Victorian House

Sustainable adaptations for the future

Rui Miguel Romão Raposo

Thesis to obtain the Master's Degree in

Architecture

Supervisors

Prof. Patrícia Isabel Mendes Lourenço

Architect Michelle Xuereb

Examination Committee

Chairperson: Prof. Ana Paula Filipe Tomé

Supervisor: Prof. Patrícia Isabel Mendes Lourenço

Member of the Committee: Prof. Manuel de Arriaga Brito Correia Guedes

May of 2018

I declare that this document is an original work of my own authorship and that it fulfills all the requirements of the Code of Conduct and Good Practices of the Universidade de Lisboa.

This dissertation was written in English, which is one of the official languages of Canada. Because of its many variations, the English used was the Canadian English, which differs from British or American English, for instance.

The units used follow the Metric system, official system used in Canada, with possible references to Imperial system, normally used to define construction materials.

The relation between existing buildings and energy efficiency has become a priority when pursuing strategies to reduce the environmental footprint of construction. While cities around the world are density constructed, these existing buildings now have the opportunity to be improved by introducing new technologies and construction methods in response to the changing climate realities. The alternative is demolition to make room for more energy efficient buildings.

Toronto is one such city that has experienced changes in density thanks to a hot real estate market. Pursuing the intent of maintaining the historical roots of the city, this document aims to define strategies on renovating existing buildings to make them more energy efficient, through the use of passive systems, and therefore preserving their original style and cultural sustainability for the future.

The study focuses on Victorian houses, paying special attention to the Bay-and- Gable - a style particular to Toronto -, which is a combination of different Victorian styles originally from the United Kingdom.

Initially addressing the principal problems regarding social, environmental and construction issues, the goal is to identify main areas of intervention that can substantially increase the energy efficiency without disregarding the environmental impact that the increase of the embodied energy can have on the ecological footprint.

By releasing this study, I will be contributing to developing a triple bottom line concept for these existing houses. First of all, people (social capital) would benefit from new strategies to improve their livability; Secondly, the planet (natural capital) would benefit by reducing the possibilities of building new houses replacing the existing ones (less resources needed); and finally, profit (economic capital) would increase by opting to renovate rather than rebuild. I would like to express my special gratitude to my professor Patricia Lourenco who gave me the golden opportunity to do this project on the topic of the Victorian House and its sustainable adaptation for the future, who encouraged me with her expertise throughout the course of my work and motivated me to pursue a career in this area. Thank you for having faith in me at every stage of this research.

I would like to thank Michelle Xuereb, for being more than a co-adviser, but a friend who I could count on for valuable insights and comprehensive advice. I also would like to thank my colleague Julia Gilbert, who helped me with revising the written portion of this project, correcting my English to get it finalized within the limited timeframe.

I cannot forget to acknowledge my family for the support, in special my sister Telma Raposo, who helped me from the beginning with the Master application to the end by personally delivering this thesis to Instituto Superior Técnico. Lastly, I would like to thank my wife Clarissa Aguiar for her patience in accompanying me through this journey.

1. Introduction ...... 1 i. Context of the Topic ...... 1 ii. Justification of the problem ...... 1 iii. Goals to be pursued ...... 3 iv. Research methodology ...... 4

2. History of the Victorian House: ...... 7 i. Appearance in Europe ...... 7 a. Victorian Homes Age ...... 7 ii. Arrival in Toronto and its expansion ...... 8 a. The Georgian Style ...... 8 b. The Victorian Style ...... 9 c. The Edwardian Style ...... 11 d. The Modern Cosmopolis ...... 12 iii. Description of the Victorian styles currently in existence in Toronto ...... 13 a. Georgian: 1800-1876 ...... 14 b. Neo-Classicism or Classical Revival (Greek and Roman): 1820-1852 ...... 15 c. Gothic Revival and High Victorian Gothic: 1840-1885 ...... 15 d. ltalianate: 1845-1885 ...... 16 e. Toronto Bay-and-Gable: 1875-1890 ...... 17 f. Renaissance Revival: 1845-1885 ...... 17 g. Second Empire: 1866-1890 ...... 18 h. Romanesque Revival: 1870-1910 ...... 19 i. Queen Anne: 1880-1900 ...... 19 j. Richardsonian Romanesque: 1886-1900 ...... 19 k. The Annex House: 1888-1899 ...... 20

3. Context ...... 23 i. Framework of the Victorian typologies in the neighbourhoods of Toronto ...... 23 ii. Description of the neighbourhood chosen to use as a case study ...... 25 a. Trinity-Bellwoods History ...... 25

4. Sampling ...... 33 i. Framework of the Sample ...... 33 ii. Inventory Analysis ...... 35 a. General Questions ...... 35 b. Social Pathologies ...... 36 c. Environmental Pathologies ...... 38 d. Construction Pathologies ...... 41 5. Case of Study ...... 45 i. Bay-and-Gable House and its emergence in Toronto ...... 45 ii. Description of the Problems in the Bay-and-Gable house ...... 49 a. Cold Roof / Attic ...... 49 b. Difficulty Cooling Down Rooms during Summer (i.e. Living room, Master Bedroom, upper floors, etc.) ...... 50 c. Insufficient Natural in Interior Rooms ...... 50 d. Leaked windows and doors ...... 51 e. Defective Mortar and Flacked or Eroded Brick on Exterior Walls ...... 52 f. Leaking Roof and Water Penetration ...... 52 iii. Original Victorian House Construction ...... 53 a. Foundations ...... 54 b. Exterior Walls ...... 54 c. Roofs ...... 55 d. Windows ...... 56 e. Doors ...... 56 iv. Energy Efficiency Results for Original House ...... 57

6. Solutions to Improve Energy Efficiency for the Case Study ...... 59 i. Renovated Victorian House Construction ...... 59 a. Condensation ...... 59 b. Thermal Bridging ...... 60 c. Ventilation and Air-Tightness ...... 60 ii. Energy Efficiency Results for Renovated House ...... 61

7. Methodologies to Calculate Overall RSI ...... 67 i. First Method: RSI vs Envelope Area ...... 67 ii. Second Method: RSI Parallel (ASHRAE Fundamentals 2009) ...... 68 iii. Third Method: HOT2000 Data vs Envelope Area ...... 68 iv. RSI total results (using the three different approaches) ...... 69

8. Operational Energy and Embodied Energy: Impacts After the Renovation ...... 71 i. Operational and Embodied Energy ...... 71 ii. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) ...... 72

9. Conclusions ...... 79 i. Future Develoments ...... 80

Bibliography ...... 81

Table 1 - Pathologies Identification and Classification Methodology...... 4 Table 2 - Operational Energy and Embodied Energy, calculation methodology...... 6 Table 3 - Consumption statistics for Original Victorian House by HOT2000...... 58 Table 4 - Consumption statistics for Renovated Victorian House vs Original Victorian House by HOT2000...... 64 Table 5 - Comparison of thermal residence by component: Original Victorian House vs Renovated Victorian House ...... 65 Table 6 - Comparison of results from different methods to calculate House RSI...... 69 Table 7 - Embodied Energy and Global Warming Potential (GWP) calculations using ICE...... 74 Table 8 - Comparison of Energy Consumption values obtained for Original and Renovated Victorian House...... 75 Table 9 - Energy consumption for different types of houses (Operational Energy)...... 79

Figure 1 - Location of the Trinity-Bellwood’s Neighbourhood in the city of Toronto and limits of Neighbourhood ...... 2 Figure 2 - (Turner and Partington, 2015) Victorian Houses exteriors and chimney- dominated skyline along Northwood Road, London...... 8 Figure 3 - (Harstone, 2005) Toronto in about 1834. The “strips” were delimited by main streets. Map from “Between the Bridge and the Brewery”...... 9 Figure 4 - (Taylor, 2014) Bay and Gable houses on the west side of Draper Street, in the Spadina/King area, built in the mid-1880s...... 11 Figure 5 - (Taylor, 2014) Historic Victorian house at 10 Bellevue Avenue. Reflect the contrast of colours and materials used at the time...... 12 Figure 6 - Georgian House in Waterloo, 1842 ...... 14 Figure 7 - (Kyles, 2010) Classical Revival House in Dundas. A boxed house with verandahs on every side, and a promenade deck on the top level with an enclosed belvedere...... 15 Figure 8 - (Warzecha, 2014) House located at the Cabbagetown Neighbourhood, trimmed with decorative wooden edging...... 16 Figure 9 - (Borrett, 2009) “Rivervilla”, northeast corner of Queen & River...... 16 Figure 10 - (Fudge, 2017) An example of Bay-and-Gable that can be found throughout Toronto...... 17 Figure 11 - (Kyles, 2012) Institutional Building completed in 1848, made from local limestone with ashlar finish...... 18 Figure 12 - (Warzecha, 2014) These homes can be found on Draper Street, in the Garden District, Cabbagetown, Parkdale, Harbord Village and on Dundas Street West, across from the Art Gallery of Ontario...... 18 Figure 13 - (Warzecha, 2014) The Romanesque Revival residences in Ontario, as the one shown, were inspired by H.H. Richardson...... 19 Figure 14 - (Warzecha, 2014) House located in the Madison Avenue...... 19 Figure 15 - The Broadview Hotel...... 20 Figure 16 - (Mirvish+Gehry Toronto, 2015a) The earliest example of an Annex Style house can be found at 37 Madison Ave. in Toronto...... 20 Figure 17 - Timeline illustrating the Victorian House Styles throughout 19th/20th centuries in Toronto...... 21 Figure 18 - Langley and Burke architectural drawings of William Elliott residence in Toronto, Ontario. From Archives of Ontario...... 24 Figure 19 - Row houses at Weston Road built using Victorian Houses as a reference .... 25 Figure 20 - (Statistics Canada, 2016) Reference values released by "Census 2016"...... 25 Figure 21 - (Harstone, 2005) Sketch map showing the Park Lots, and the early intersection of Dundas and Queen Street...... 26 Figure 22 - (Harstone, 2005) A sketch of the Pine Grove, built in 1802 by Col. James Givins and one of Toronto's oldest homes...... 26 Figure 23 - Victorian house at 28 Halton Street, currently occupied by Maynard Nursing Home...... 27 Figure 24 - (Lost Toronto, 2013) The corner of Queen West and Gore Vale, looking north west with Gore Vale house in the distance...... 28 Figure 25 - (Harstone, 2005) Construction activity table of Crawford and Shaw streets. 29 Figure 26 - (Harstone, 2005) Table of building cycles variation in Toronto...... 30 Figure 27 - 108 - 110 - 112 Crawford Street houses...... 30 Figure 28 - Semi-detached houses located at Crawford Street. The best remaining examples of houses with sunroom...... 31 Figure 29 - Bay-and-Gable house at 178 Crawford Street. As noted, the house has been renovated along the life span...... 34 Figure 30 – Illustrative map of the Bay-and-Gable houses location in the Trinity- Bellwoods Neighbourhood...... 45 Figure 31 - (Weir, 2016) 418 - 420 Sackville Constructed by James Nurse, 1888 ...... 46 Figure 32 - (Weir, 2016) Example of large lot at 180-282 Carlton, allowing side windows to lighten the centre rooms. Normally, the windows would only appear on front and rear facades...... 46 Figure 33 - (Weir, 2016) Asymmetrical pair at 24 - 26 Elgin, 1879...... 47 Figure 34 - (Weir, 2016) Bay-and-Gable four different Ground Floor plans widths...... 47 Figure 35 - (Weir, 2016) House on Berkeley undergoing facade reconstruction, showing the wood plank backing...... 48 Figure 36 - (Weir, 2016) A row of eight substantial houses at 410-432 Dundas Street, 1884, constructed in series rather than paired mirror image units. Scott Weir, 2015. ... 49 Figure 37 - (Windfinder, 2018) Statistics based on observations taken between 02/2007 - 03/2018 daily from 7am to 7pm local time, in the Toronto Island Airport...... 50 Figure 38 - Floor plans of Victorian House located at 267 and 269 Sherbourne Street. .. 51 Figure 39 - (Rock, 2015) Rotten window caused by water infiltration...... 51 Figure 40 - One example of Aluminum Storm Window in a Victorian House...... 51 Figure 41- (Rock, 2015) Defective Wall Mortar and Eroded Wall Brick...... 52 Figure 42 - (Aponte, 2004) Ice Dams...... 52 Figure 43 - (University of the West of England, 2009) Section of typical Victorian houses in different cities. On left, a house located in London and on right, o house in Toronto. 53 Figure 44 - (Cabbagetown Heritage Conservation District Committee, 2018) Bay-and- Gable house description by Cabbagetown Preservation Association...... 54 Figure 45 - (Aponte, 2004) Stone Ruble foundation wall on left side. Brick foundation wall on right side...... 54 Figure 46 - (University of the West of England, 2009) Four examples of exterior walls built for Victorian Houses. First two, examples of early cavity walls and cast iron used in UK, and last two, the Torontonian double brick wall with lath and plaster, and wood stud wall with siding...... 55 Figure 47 - (Aponte, 2004) Types of Attics...... 56 Figure 48 - Example of sash windows with sheet glass...... 56 Figure 49 - Levels of heat loss in a typical Bay-and-Gable house through parts of its envelope...... 57 Figure 50 - Bay-and-gable Victorian house located at 200 -202 Shaw Street...... 57 Figure 51 - (Official Fine Homebuilding Post, 2010) Illustrative example of the importance of vapour barriers to the wall...... 59 Figure 52 - (Lstiburek, 2004) Vapour Diffusion and Air Pressure Diagram. Location of Vapour Barrier on Cold Climates...... 60 Figure 53 - (Aponte, 2004) Wood studs create a thermal bridge...... 60 Figure 54 - (Aponte, 2004) Insulating an existing wall on the interior side...... 62 Figure 55 - (Aponte, 2004) Baffles can be used to maintain airflow through the soffit vents...... 62 Figure 56 - (Aponte, 2004) Double-hung window showing parts and air-leakage paths. 63 Figure 57 - (Aponte, 2004) Insulation the joist header area for different basement walls...... 64 Figure 58 - Comparison of heat loss: Original Victorian House and Renovated Victorian House...... 65 Figure 59 - Comparison of Estimated Annual Energy Consumption for Original and Renovated Victorian Houses...... 75 Figure 60 - Comparison of Estimated GHG emissions for Original and Renovated Victorian Houses...... 76 Figure 61 - Evolution of Energy Consumption for Original and Renovated Victorian Houses...... 77 Figure 62 - Evolution of Estimated Energy Consumption for New Energy Efficient house and Renovated Bay-and-Gable house...... 78

In North America, wood has been one of the main materials used in traditional construction, not only as a structural component but also as a cladding in many houses. Toronto, the City in which I am currently living, has many examples of this traditional type of construction. With the aim of understanding the evolution of this British architectural style, I intend to focus my research on the construction techniques of the Victorian house style, as well as explore its energy performance and livability according to current thermal comfort standards.

In the City of Toronto, the majority of houses maintain their original Victorian Architecture characteristics, a style that was born and developed in England during the reign of Queen Victoria (1837 – 1901). It is quite common to find this architectural style in any Toronto neighbourhoods, strategically planned in a way to combine landscape with the typical brick construction of that time. However, in some parts of the city, areas were transformed into important business centres, where residential spaces were replaced by skyscrapers and dominated by commercial uses such as banks, corporate entities and public services. When not in use as commercial office space, these buildings contain residential condominiums (normally very compact apartments for temporary rental), and contributed to demand for new homes outside of the downtown core that offer a quieter lifestyle. This decentralization phenomenon is increasing, and periphery cities have been growing as this residential expansion affords better prices for new homebuyers, larger properties and better energy performance when compared with older houses.

Many of the houses in the city are already centenarian and there is an urgent need for their rehabilitation and renovation. Apart from the degradation due to the natural decay of the construction materials, high energy consumption and functional inadequacy of interior spaces, there is also a strong pressure amid the real estate market in Toronto to increase property value. With this comes a desire for faster renovations, which contributes to the implementation of new construction techniques and methods to address those time exigencies.

The Victorian House returned to be a trending style, reviving the prestige earned decades ago which motivated the construction of entire neighbourhoods with this specific architectural style, and that nowadays is still very common in the city. Initially, this study will provide an overview at larger scale, aiming to identify all existing Victorian architectural styles within the city. After that, an analysis looking at the neighbourhood scale will allow identifying patterns at a smaller scale. I have selected the “Trinity- Bellwoods” neighbourhood as a case study due to my experience as an inhabitant and because this neighbourhood contains a large variety of styles (Figure 1). Lastly, the same analysis will be done focusing on the scale of the residential unit, with the aim to study a particular type of house, previously identified as “Bay-and-Gable”. This style was developed in Toronto, to fit in narrow lots that resulted from the urban plan designed for the City by Mirvish+Gehry (Mirvish+Gehry Toronto, 2015b) office in 2015.

1

Due to the development of new construction methodologies (concrete and steel) and increasingly strict legislation, many Victorian houses are being totally transformed and converted in modern houses, losing their Victorian style and consequently, losing their history and authenticity. Part of this study objective is to change this current situation and preserve the Victorian architectural style, so that it can continue to be part of the city in the future, while still complying with current needs and meet future demands, in particular taking into account temperature increase due to climate changes.

Figure 1 - Location of the Trinity-Bellwood’s Neighbourhood in the city of Toronto and limits of Neighbourhood

However, not only the speed of construction has been prioritized when deciding to rehabilitate an old house, and other construction aspects such as sustainability have been gaining importance. This aspect will be an important component to this study, considering that sustainability and energy efficiency have been assets for the inhabitants when looking to decrease the demand for energy. The intention is to study both embodied energy and operational energy for various renovation strategies, such as keeping all the existing structure and exterior cladding but changing the interior finishing. The approach is based on introducing strategies and techniques to the renovations that would increase the energy efficiency to reach a target of 40% energy savings when compared to original energy consumption. This target value is derived from the new goal proposal published by the City of Toronto (City of Toronto, 2011), which targets the carbon emissions of existing and new buildings as key strategies to climate change mitigation.

2

This dissertation topic is driven by my new perspective for my future as an Architect. Since I have arrived in Toronto, I noticed that there is a huge demand for Victorian houses within the real estate market and I decided that I would like to work on something related.

My initial idea was to turn these houses into more sustainable models by trying to find a more rational building method that minimizes the waste. After intensive research throughout the last year and my observations during the renovation progression of houses in the neighbourhood that I live, I have noticed that there are a huge waste of materials, especially during the structural framing phase and the construction speed is not optimized as it could be.

Furthermore, as mentioned before there is a demand in the Toronto real estate market for Victorian houses for sale, and for that reason I intend to use the research as a catalyst to create processes and construction methods that could be applied for fast and sustainable renewals, and hereafter to create my own business that would embrace this niche market.

The sustainable construction, namely the use of bioclimatic strategies and passive systems, is something that I was always fascinated by since the beginning of my professional practice. However, I had never found the right moment or the enthusiasm to study this theme in detail in a way that it would result in a practical case as I have now. My intention is to use the knowledge acquired during this study to relaunch my interest in sustainable strategies to reduce the environmental impact of construction.

The main motivation is to focus on studying actual construction methods that can be incorporated into the renovation of Victorian homes, to significantly improve the house’s energy consumption, while establishing a relationship between the embodied energy and the operational energy consumption post-renovated.

According to a study developed 20 years ago by Ray Cole, Professor of the University of Architecture of British Columbia (Holladay, 2013), the embodied energy in a country house with approximately 350 m2, would be:

i. For a house in Toronto, built in a conventional way, the energy for heating would be of 136 MMBTU (Million British Thermal Units) / year; embodied energy equals to 948 MMBTU (or 7 years of energy for heating).

ii. For a house in Toronto, built with energy efficiency, the energy for heating would be of 78 MMBTU / year; embodied energy equals to 1.019 MMBTU (or 13.1 years of energy for heating).

In 1995, in a paper of Home Energy Magazine (Mumma, 1995), Tracy Mumma, Coordinator of the Center of Resources of Construction Technologies of Missoula, Montana, reported that a typical house in Toronto would need 10 years of energy consumption to equal the embodied energy of its construction. It means a value in between a traditional house and one considered energy efficient, according to the estimate of Ray Coles described above.

3

Now, it is possible to reach more realist results, and for that reason, I will try to find the results between energy consumption and embodied energy for the following options:

1. Traditional Victorian House without alterations of its original construction;

2. Victorian House partial renovated.

For both options, operational energy and embodied energy will be calculated to determine when the energy needed to renovate the house (Renovation Embodied Energy) plus the operational energy after renovation is equal to the operational energy of original Victorian house. These results will be presented graphically.

To understand the process of construction developed in these Toronto neighbourhoods, it is important to understand their history and contribution to the city’s sprawl. One part of the document will be dedicated to describe all Victorian house typologies and presented by a chronological diagram, to illustrate the years and neighbourhoods where each style has occurred.

At the same time, an understanding of the construction methodology of this style will be described, referring to the adaptations needed in order to adapt the typology to the extreme cold weather of Toronto, which is much more adverse than in England; the main pathologies that have presented themselves, and how the pathologies might be addressed.

Regarding the pathologies, three different types will be considered:

Table 1 - Pathologies Identification and Classification Methodology.

Analysis of the Quality analysis of the Analysis of the functional environment inside the most common effectiveness of house, identifying current the main spaces whether it fulfills the construction of the houses minimum conditions of problems. Main regarding the natural illumination, pathologies that current demands ventilation and thermal have happened of use for those comfort or not. throughout the spaces. years and identification of their causes. Survey to Thermal measurements. Bibliographical residents and Surveys. Analysis of revision. Analysis other relevant energy usage, analysis of cases. Visual research material. of plans, sections and inspection. façades.

The methodology to obtain the information described above will be through a survey that will be answered by people who live in this style of house in the

4

neighbourhood initially defined. The initial goal is to collect between 50 and 100 (hundred) completed questionnaires.

Hereafter the data collected will be separated into two different categories of intervention:

1. Houses that have not undergone any alteration to their original state;

2. Houses that were partially renovated, factoring in the percentage of intervention completed, relative to the division of their compartments, and alterations of their external walls.

When the research regarding pathologies is concluded, the next step will begin understanding the construction methods behind the Victorian Houses in Toronto. In the first phase, I intend to compare the traditional construction techniques used in these houses to the new techniques that have been part of more energy efficient techniques used nowadays. The goal is to understand how new techniques could be adapted and used to improve existing houses during renovations without losing key qualities of the Victorian house. These principles are related to a reduction of materials during construction, and consequently, less production of waste; use of materials with sustainable certification; installing thermal insulation through crucial areas of the house to reduce the heat loss.

The study will cover the construction of the following components of the house:

1. Foundations; 2. Structure; 3. Exterior Walls; 4. Roof; 5. Doors and Windows.

The final part of the thesis will be dedicated to understanding the ratio of embodied energy versus operational energy, and their impact in the emission of greenhouse gases. This study, in addition of what was mentioned previously, has the intention of demonstrate the energy efficiency for the two cases of study and how both can be related to optimize the energy consumption independently of increasing the embodied energy during the renovation.

The references for calculating the values for both components are following described:

5

Table 2 - Operational Energy and Embodied Energy, calculation methodology.

Using the software provided by Natural Based on documents that contain embodied Recourses Canada, HOT2000, which is energy values for various materials used for an operating energy analysis program construction and calculators to obtain global for residential buildings results according to the construction type, (www.buildingsgroup.nrcan.gc.ca). It is intervention and demolition. a versatile whole house operating AthenaTM EcoCalculator for Residential energy simulator and is used to Assemblies. evaluate housing designs for the Inventory of Carbon & Energy (ICE) Version R20001 program on a regional basis. 2.0, which is an embodied energy and embodied carbon footprint database for building materials.

1 R2000 is a program offered by Natural R-2000 is a program offered by Natural Resources Canada’s Office of Energy Efficiency that encourages and certifies the building of energy efficient houses that are environmentally responsible and healthy to live in, according to certain criteria.

6

The Victorian Period in Toronto is obviously derived from its British antecedent. Similarities can be found when studying the appearance of this style in both countries. Toronto and London, as similar metropoles, have faced nearly identical cycles of growth and many strategies used in Toronto to accommodate housing sprawl have been informed by the experience in London. The intention here is to understand how the history of the British Victorian house has impacted the appearance of Toronto’s Victorian house style.

The 19th century was marked by several social changes in England resulting from the industrial revolution that brought millions of farmers to the cities. It was a period where Victorian politicians, architects, engineers and health scientists developed groundbreaking interventions to improve living conditions in the cities.

Apart from these efforts, other improvements such as the expansion of the railway brought mobility and the transportation of mass-produced building components, which enabled speculative builders to build more efficiently. As a result, new suburbs rapidly emerged around major cities.

However, this social change brought to light serious concerns about poor living conditions for urban workers. Along with cities’ rapid growth and emergence of slums, illnesses like tuberculosis appeared and spread uncontrolled. London alone registered over 43,000 people killed by devastating outbreak of cholera between 1832 and 1866 (Turner and Partington, 2015).

Problematic developments constructed by the early Victorians enabled the rise of diseases that killed thousands of people. The government was obligated to address these problems, and a number of significant improvements took place. A new Model Home design was the base driver of the new public health strategies for the City of London, such as a renewed sewage system developed by Joseph Bazalgette (Cook, 2001), the chief engineer of London’s Metropolitan Board of Works, as well as the implementation of the 1878 Building Act which established new By-Laws for housing development.

Houses during this period reinforced the separation of social classes in society and reflected the wealth of those who owned them. The concept of villas was created for the rich and top of middle class, and became a status symbol with exposed, ornate exteriors and separated spaces for owners and servants. The typical villa usually boasted several reception rooms, which could include a drawing room, a mourning room and elaborate conservatories.

Less prestigious homes existed for middle class families of modest income. Often, these houses overlapped with upper end homes for well paid workers, and facilities were

7

more basic and typically followed a “two-up two-down” room configuration (Turner and Partington, 2015) (Figure 2).

In contrast with previous solutions, the houses of poorly paid industrial workers were usually laid out as two-roomed “back to backs”, built in densities approaching 250 houses per hectare. In these homes, the kitchen was turned into as minimal space as possible, allow just for the cooking and relying on other spaces for having the meals.

As the Victorian period progressed, major strides were made across all classes of new homes. The lack of electricity meant that tasks like washing clothes, cooking, cleaning and simply keeping the house warm relied on candlelight and fireplaces. New standards allowed for a safer home while improvements in facilities and appliances addressed heath issues.

Architectural styles such as the Regency style and the later Italianate and Gothic revival influenced Figure 2 - (Turner and Partington, 2015) the design of houses throughout the English Victorian Victorian Houses exteriors and chimney- dominated skyline along Northwood period. Victorian Toronto evolved in much the same Road, London. fashion. The Arts and Crafts movement had built a strong influence by the 1880s in response to industrialization and contradicted the principles of the era by adding value on “traditional craftsmanship and the natural beauty of material in design” (Turner and Partington, 2015). This influence became the most important international trend at the end of 19th century, and its impact continues to be seen in subsequent housing design.

There are a variety of historic influences that compound the look of a city, and there are specific factors that create identity of the city, such as the purpose behind the creation of the place, the character of the population, the climate of the place and the nature of available resources, such as materials and technology. Although the thrust of these influences may change over time, new tendencies are generally built on foundations already in place. The City of Toronto plays an important role throughout this process by creating policies and regulations that drive planning and design strategies such as The Heritage Act or Environmental Regulations (Environment & Energy Division, 2017).

Toronto was settled by the British in 1793 at the end of the Georgian period. The site where the city sits was chosen for its good harbour and detachment from the American border (M. S. Careless, 2013). A geometric gridiron of ten square blocks was laid out by the military surveyors facing the bay at the eastern end of the harbour,

8

centered on today's King and Sherbourne Streets. The first structures unveiled in those streets were detached wooden dwellings which construction was similar to a shelter.

Toronto, named capital of the new colonial province of Upper Canada, was designed to be more than a simple military outpost. The civil servants who were brought in to run the province, promptly introduced the elegance and refinement of Georgian style and quickly commenced building a number of impressive churches and public structures intended to contain and articulate the community. In 1834, Toronto was granted the status of city by the province and a two-storey brick courthouse and jail with similar appearance were built to establish order and civility for the little settlement of 9,000 people, while a Renaissance stone Figure 3 - (Harstone, 2005) Toronto in about 1834. The “strips” were delimited St. James' Church by main streets. Map from “Between the Bridge and the Brewery”. pontificated the presence of God.

The houses built following the temporary settling period were derived from the Georgian age in the British homeland, although the colonial situation and harsher climate gave Toronto's dwellings a simpler and more solid appearance. This formal-looking brick manor was built in response to the provincial governor's "park lot" scheme, which aimed to encourage the establishment of a colonial aristocracy for his outpost of Empire, and to that end awarded 30 senior officials 100 acres each on which to create expansive estates facing the existing town. Laid out in narrow 200 meter strips running north from Queen Street (originally called Lot Street) to Bloor Street (originally First Concession Line) (Figure 3), the park lots were further extended to become the town's grid pattern, and today those abutting areas have been converted into Toronto's main north/south streets and avenues.

The town proper was small and compact, circumscribed by the area that a person could comfortably walk. Houses stood single or in rows with buildings containing banks, hotels, and shops in between, with the latter often doubling as homes. Because of their proximity and mixed-use character, these nice designed colonial structures employed a similar architectural look and scale. Toronto's settlers were responsible for bringing the English order, clarity, and reasonableness to the wild Canadian territory.

Following the War of 1812 and the accumulation of mercantile fortunes through profiteering, the government of Toronto decided to move forward with converting the city into an important economic asset for Canada based on enterprise and commerce.

9

The harbour was the key achieving economic growth, and after 1850, the St. Lawrence Canal and railway lines also played key roles.

Between 1834 and 1854, Toronto's population almost quadrupled to over 30,000 inhabitants, and the city prospered as a major trade centre, losing only to Montreal in British North America.

The first merchants and bankers of this new entrepreneurial trend perfectly represented the industrious spirit of the Victorian Age: hardworking, ambitious, outwardly complacent yet in restive search of symbols that would lend them legitimacy and authority (M. S. Careless, 2013). They built rich monuments to capitalism in an eclectic variety of styles, hoping to capture not only the beauty of form but also the efficacy of allusion, such as Gothic manor houses, Italianate villas, Romanesque abbeys and Queen Anne cottages as examples. Many of these picturesque houses still stand, maintaining the Victorian legacy on such important streets as Jarvis, St. George, and Queen's Park.

A memory of the Victorian city also exists in the flamboyant warehouses and factories on Front Street East, one of which (no. 139-145) originally processed and shipped the thousands of pigs that gave the name "Hogtown" to Toronto in this era (Bateman, 2013). Other manifestations of this style are the stout churches, which marks important intersections along the downtown of the city, donated by the captains of commerce as an affirmation of their respectability, rootedness, and ties to the British homeland.

These Victorian structures were almost invariably built of brick. The first bylaw to its new charter passed by the incorporated City of Toronto in 1834 dealt with the prevention of fire. Bylaws regulating fire hazards, and therefore building materials, dominated the cautious lawmakers concerns for at least the next 75 years (City of Toronto, 1904). Despite all of these precautions and bylaws, Toronto suffered two Great Fires, one in 1849 and another in 1904. Brick was legislated for wide areas of the city, and Toronto's clay pits were able to provide both red and yellow varieties. The latter variety was deemed as white in colour in the 19th century, and originally was thought of as a substitute for stone, a material not readily available here (limestone came from Ohio; granite from Quebec).

The extensive use of both red and yellow brick for a single building became a favorite design option, in accordance with general predilection for simple present in the city, flat surfaces to give the appearance of solidity. It is interesting to notice that row housing such as was inhabited by the wealthy in London, New York, and Montreal, did not have the same representation or importance here. Even the middle class avoided the row housing that gave definition to 19th century streets in most other cities of this size.

10

Instead, Victorian Toronto built double houses - single buildings comprised of two semi-detached dwellings, one beside the other separated by a common party wall (Figure 4). Set about 20 feet back from the street with a patch of garden in front, these symmetrical double houses with roof lines broken by picturesque barge-boarded gables, imparted a softened and almost suburban look to the city. Built so close together as to resemble a row, these two and three- Figure 4 - (Taylor, 2014) Bay and Gable houses on the west side of storey semi-detached Draper Street, in the Spadina/King area, built in the mid-1880s. dwellings encouraged a sense of community by providing a harmonious human scale for the street. At the same time, they provided an inviting path between public sidewalk and private space through a small garden to front door. Toronto's most visible heritage from the Victorian city is surely this complex sense of accommodation and articulation of individual and community, home and street, suburban and urban. (Taylor, 2014)

In the last decades of the 19th century, new tendencies began to surge to incorporate a new ideal for the city as became much more than simply a base for government and commerce, by also developing an open mind that appreciated the highest forms of culture and society.

In this view, Toronto was included in a group along with cities in the United States, which aimed to create a civilization in the New World centres that would be as expansive, as rich, as great, as those of the Old Continent (Hulchanski, 2010). It was a period of prosperity and optimism across North America, and confidence of vision gave rise to physical expansion of these rapidly industrializing cities through annexation of surrounding communities and acclamation of the centre through the construction of grand and imposing public buildings.

Toronto had already annexed the Village of Yorkville in 1883. In 1884 it added Brockton, and in 1889 the Village of Parkdale. In 1900, with a population of almost 200,000, Toronto ranked as one of North America's major centres. By 1912 it had taken over nine more surrounding municipalities and doubled its population. What made annexation feasible were new transportation networks crossing the metropolis that connected the populace with jobs, homes, and the downtown core.

An abundance of civic monuments began to rise, denoting the importance of public investment and bringing to Toronto the sense of progress, possibility, and world

11

place. These included the Provincial Parliament Building (1892), City Hall (1899), the Royal Ontario Museum (1914), the Art Gallery of Ontario (1918), and Union Station (1920).

Toronto's original metropolitan vision was in line with European standards in that it did not include skyscrapers. Toronto City Council decided on Toronto's first tall building in 1906, the 15-storey Traders Bank designed by New York architects Carrere & Hastings (E. Winterton, 2015). Initially, there were discussions about sanitation, safety, and traffic, as well as aesthetics in many major cities at time. Paris had a limit of six storeys and London rejected the new architectural trends related to tall buildings. However, in New York City there were 175 structures of 15 storeys or more (the Woolworth Building had over 50), and Toronto ultimately embraced the New World and elected not to limit height. Having made this decision, the metropolis set about building The Tallest Building in the British Empire, a 34-storey office building raised by Canadian Bank of Commerce in 1929.

In comparison to other North America cities, Toronto has not replaced the majority of the Victorian city. The prominent legacy from this era, however, is unquestionably the understanding gained at that time of the role that architecture and planning can play in the quality of daily life, and most particularly the influence of the citizens in shaping that role. That is why today, through independent citizens' groups as well as the municipal process, the population in Toronto possesses a good measure of control over what happens to their urban environment. This is the consequence of the legacy left by a metropolitan ideal.

In the United States, the pattern of urban development following World War II was determined by the automobile, expressway, and suburb development which offered every man the possibility of a home of his own through federally assisted loans and mortgages. Satellite shopping centres grew up to serve the new suburban communities, drawing off energy from the downtown.

Toronto followed this trend by building Don Mills as the first suburban centre. However, suburbs remained expanding thanks to waves of immigrants who had begun to arrive here, bringing new life to the low-scale Victorian residential streets.

The newcomers brought much more to Toronto than urban well-being, however. The important growth in workforce, and its Figure 5 - (Taylor, 2014) Historic Victorian house at 10 Bellevue multicultural character, has Avenue. Reflect the contrast of colours and materials used at the helped to make Toronto a world time. city of close to 3 million people whose diversity and differences have come together to create a place of urban vigour and grace. This manifest itself in the Cosmopolis's variety

12

of neighbourhoods, each with its own colours, signs, and adaptations of built form like the Portuguese glazed-tile icons which added a different touch to Victorian brick houses on Bellevue Avenue, for example (Figure 5). These neighbourhoods did not dominate or conquer one another. It means that Toronto's distinct communities acted to accommodate and enhance the whole, and this is surely urbanity in the best sense.

However, Toronto did succumb in the late 1950s and early 1960s to the urban- renewal tendency, before political reforms and citizens’ groups spearheaded a move to more generous solutions in the form of rehabilitation. Toronto was the largest, most powerful city in Canada by the 1960s, and money flowed into the cosmopolis, feeding the financial, commercial, and communications industries that thrived here. Old buildings were levelled, the skyline rose substantially, and Toronto became indistinguishable comparing with other cities around the world by adopting the same high-rise building style.

An important change came through the elected Reform city council, which resulted in Toronto's 1976 Central Area Plan (Schubert, 2014). Today this visionary program serves to discourage mass redevelopment while encouraging generally smaller or mixed-use buildings with a high residential component; it has put a priority on continuity of streetscape and especially street line; and, finally, it has fostered integration of the urban fabric through historic building preservation combined with complementary new building construction.

The issues raised by the Central Area Plan have also served to highlight the rich diversity of urban landscape, a landscape that juxtaposes Georgian formality, Victorian vigour, Edwardian grandeur, and modern technology and pluralism. Today people in large numbers are returning to the centre to live, by occupying and transforming these areas with new lifestyles.

To make Toronto an inviting city, municipalities have combined efforts to enhance public spaces by adding warm brick pavement, bold coloured banners, street trees and open green spaces for the pleasure and joy of its inhabitants, as well as other small details that help orient what already abides here.

The look of Toronto will be determined by how the European and American trends influences, the immigrant and native experiences, the old and new styles, the high and low buildings, the brick walls and green spaces are stimulated to interact, providing for the inhabitants an important public environment. A great city is where differences not only exist, but where differences create lively encounters and open discourse. It is only through such discourse that Toronto can genuinely acquire a sense of itself as a good and fruitful place to be.

The history of Toronto’s Victorian styles followed in many ways the congenial British Victorian styles. To introduce each style in an efficient way, not only would physical properties be attached to a stylistic label, but historical period, geographical source, building method, and even cultural determinants would be as well. Terms vary from epoch to epoch. Styles with the same name also vary from place to place. A Queen Anne house in Toronto is not identical to one in New York, as an example. This was particularly

13

evident in the 19th century, exactly the same epoch of Toronto's formation, when new styles, or new versions of old styles, arrived in greater number and more rapidly than at any other time in history. One option to understand the changes in architecture is to think of the various styles as cycles that alternate between classical and picturesque (Cruickshank, 2008).

One or a series of symmetrical, orderly classical styles is followed by one or a series of asymmetric, dynamic picturesque styles, in turn succeeded by a reactive wave of classical styles, and so on. Sometimes an intermediate classical and picturesque style such as Italianate may interfere, and overlaps can occur.

Following are the names and description of styles associated with a few notes on the what, where, and why of them. Definitions apply specifically to Toronto buildings, as to relevant dates. However, some buildings are so idiosyncratic and eclectic that to find proper classification is a challenge.

The Georgian style was named by the first three King Georges whose reigns between 1714 and 1820 that has coincided with the style's major period of popularity in England (Palmer, 2016). Toronto was settled by the British near the end of the Georgian period and this small scale movement was the first real architectural expression.

The Georgian style was used for both two-storey detached houses and two, three, and four-storey row houses and shops. It was also adopted for factories and warehouses. Toronto's Georgian buildings followed British example but were simpler and plainer. They are characterized by a symmetrical box centered on a formal entrance bay in detached houses, or with the hall and entrance at one side in row houses (used to be attached to demising walls). Cladding used to be wood, roughcast, or red or yellow brick (called white brick at the time). Roofs were adapted to Toronto climate conditions with a lower pitch than their British counterparts, either hipped or end gable, with dormer windows, plain or dentilled cornices, and large tall chimneys. Doors are often ornate with sidelights and top light, perhaps a crowning pediment and sheltering portico. Windows, straight- topped of sliding-sash type, Figure 6 - Georgian House in Waterloo, 1842 have from six to twelve panes of glass in each sash. Sills and lintels are of wood or stone, or there may be relieving arches of radial brick set flush with the wall. Decorative brick may happen at corners of brick houses.

Toronto continued to build in the Georgian style even after it lost importance in the homeland, where it had surged. In later versions, however, picturesque features were appended to the classical Georgian (Figure 6), notably cladding of yellow brick with red

14

brick accents, or red with yellow, windows with a gently rounded curve at the top and fewer panes, and perhaps a decorative brick corbel table enriching the cornice.

There are no buildings remaining in Toronto that can properly be representing the Roman Revival. As for Greek Revival (Figure 7), although it was considered symbolically addressed for the new American nation where it dominated residential architecture between 1830 and 1840, it has represented less enthusiasm among the citizens of Toronto. Only a few Greek Revival houses are known and most of them Figure 7 - (Kyles, 2010) Classical Revival House in Dundas. A boxed are illustrated in books. Its house with verandahs on every side, and a promenade deck on the top chaste and formal look did level with an enclosed belvedere. appeal, however governments have decided to attach this style only to some commercial and civic buildings. Greek Revival buildings are characterized by a symmetrical and box shape, sometimes with Greek columns and entablature, smooth stone or yellow brick cladding, with the intention of approximating the colour of stone, and low-pitched or flat roofs. Windows and doors are straight-topped and lintelled.

The Gothic Revival style first appeared in England in the late 1700s. In the same orbit of British tradition and example, Toronto was quick embrace the picturesque style. English prototypes were closely followed for Gothic Revival churches. Three forms were revived: squat, high steepled Early English, with masonry cladding and pointed single light windows, decorated or middle pointed, featuring windows of curvilinear trace, and attenuated perpendicularity, marked by slender spires, elongated pinnacles, and crenellations.

For later High Victorian Gothic churches, Toronto architects used the general shapes and pointed arches of Gothic Revival but added a variety of cladding materials for a rich polychrome effect (Figure 8). These were also inspired by English models, which in turn had been influenced by John Ruskin's writings (Ruskin, 1883) on the application of colour in architecture.

15

Sources to use on Gothic Revival residential architecture came more often from the United States, where the style was promoted for single detached houses through builders' guides, notably those of Alexander Jackson Davis and Andrew Jackson Downing (Mace, 2015). Toronto's Gothic Revival houses are typically symmetrical one and a Figure 8 - (Warzecha, 2014) House located at the Cabbagetown half-storey cottages with Neighbourhood, trimmed with decorative wooden edging. centre gable or asymmetric two storeys L- shaped structures. Cladding may be roughcast, red or yellow brick.

Roofs are steeply pitched and with multiple gables with curvilinear bargeboard trim. Windows are tall and slender, either straight-topped or with a pointed• arch, sometimes protected by decorative drip molds.

Later High Victorian Gothic houses featured two colours of brick, usually red with yellow for decoration, denoted heavier ornaments, especially bargeboards, and corbel tables running under the eaves as well as other decorative brick patterns and panels.

What has come to be called "ltalianate" style (Figure 9) actually was conceived first in England as a revival of early Renaissance forms and furthermore has illumined gentlemen's club buildings (Kyles, 2001). The style was broadly adopted in the United States for detached houses. American pattern books illustrated vague, romantically expansive Italian country villas by the score.

Americans appreciated the flexible style because an Italianate house could be made to look as picturesque as a Gothic one without Gothic's burden of English influence. Italianate houses may be symmetrical or asymmetric. They sometimes feature a tall, off-centre tower and often a long veranda. Cladding is usually yellow brick. Roofs are flat or low pitched with extended eaves, generally set with ornate brackets. Windows with round heads projected from it or Figure 9 - (Borrett, 2009) “Rivervilla”, northeast corner of Queen & River.

16

with relieved flush arches. In the period, wooden detailing was most often painted with creamy white or heavy dark green colours.

The facility with which local builders achieved a graceful combination of Italianate and Gothic Revival modes is abundantly visible in Toronto's Bay-and-Gables, a distinctive form of double and row house that appeared all across the city in the fourth quarter of the 19th century.

Characterized by polygonal end bays on top of which spring pointy gables edged in decorative bargeboards, these rhythmic compositions are virtually Toronto's architectural trademark (Figure 10). The oldest known example standing is the Struthers/Ross house in Yorkville designed by Grant & Dick in 1875 (McHugh and Bozikovic, 2017). It may have been the inspiration for the speculative construction of Bay-and-Gable houses that Figure 10 - (Fudge, 2017) An example of Bay-and-Gable that can followed. be found throughout Toronto. Typically, Bay-and-Gable houses are in tones of soft orangey-red brick with yellow brick details. Earlier examples tend to have Italianate round head windows, angled bays, and steep gables. Those dating from the late 1880s show more Queen Anne influence, with rectangular bays, straight-topped windows, and lower pitched gables.

A more ambitious and strong Renaissance Revival (French and English as well as Italian) than the Italianate houses was embraced by the merchant class of Toronto for commercial blocks, warehouses, and factories. This style here followed the example of the United States and its mid-century cast-iron architecture. Despite cast-iron facades never garnering much enthusiasm in Toronto, iron was common for interior supporting columns as well as for selected exterior ornamentation.

The Renaissance Revival style was also used in a way to project both classical tradition and a fashionable look for civic and bank structures (Figure 11). It was not rigidly proscribed and allowed builders and architects a relatively free hand.

Two different modes are often seen. Conservative Renaissance Revival buildings are symmetrical and boxed, without columns. The cladding is usually smooth-looking

17

brick or stone. Roofs are low pitched or even flat. Windows are straight-topped with cornice, segmented, and/or triangular window heads.

The other examples are more extravagant but also symmetrical and rectangular. However, they are usually taller than they are wide. Cladding may be stone, but is more often brick. Roofs are flat with ornate cornices. Windows have round heads in a variety of arch forms, with bold Figure 11 - (Kyles, 2012) Institutional Building completed in window heads. Decorative details, 1848, made from local limestone with ashlar finish. classically inspired and frequently rendered in cast iron, are rich and profuse.

The Second Empire style came to Canada from France via the United States and to a lesser extent via England. It was first used here in 1866 by Toronto architect Henry Langley for Government House and then dominated major public architecture during the 1870s and domestic architecture through the 1880s. It had a short period of prominence in the city when comparing with other styles in the city. For that key period, however, the impressive and ornamental style perfectly captured the attention of entrepreneurial ambition that characterized Toronto in the years following Confederation2.

Second Empire buildings typically take the shape of symmetrical square blocks that are richly decorated for a highly sculptural profile. Cladding is usually yellow brick with red brick decorative touches, less often red with yellow. Roofs are always of the mansard type- straight, convex, or concave- pierced by dormer windows (Figure 12). Figure 12 - (Warzecha, 2014) These homes can be found on Doors and windows are round- Draper Street, in the Garden District, Cabbagetown, Parkdale, headed and often paired, with Harbord Village and on Dundas Street West, across from the Art Gallery of Ontario. moulded window heads. Decorative details may include brackets at eaves and belt courses. The brick was sometimes painted for protection, usually in a colour to match its natural tone.

2 The 1867 Constitution Act (also known as The British North America Act, 1867, or the BNA Act) formed the Canadian Confederation, making the three colonies into the four provinces of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec.

18

The descriptive label "Romanesque" refers to the reintroduction of classical Roman architecture, especially the Roman arch. The Victorians revived the form, calling it the "round-arched style" (Figure 13).

Architects in Toronto occasionally used Romanesque Revival for churches. This style of structure may be symmetrical or asymmetric, the latter sometimes with towers of differing heights. Cladding is Figure 13 - (Warzecha, 2014) The Romanesque smooth-looking brick or stone. Windows Revival residences in Ontario, as the one shown, and all openings are round-arched. were inspired by H.H. Richardson. Decoration may include arcaded corbel tables, buttresses, and parapeted towers.

This extravagantly picturesque style was the invention of Richard Norman Shaw and his fellows British architects who had set about recreating the informal, vernacular, and slightly medieval houses which they maintained existed in 17th century England (Saint, 1976).

In North America, the style's popularity spread rapidly after the British erected two widely publicized Queen Anne buildings at the 1876 Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia. Queen Anne houses are typically single detached (Figure 14).

Windows are generally straight-topped with single panes of plate glass in each sash; transoms and round-arched top lights are common. Decorative detail is profuse and includes wooden spindle work, terracotta panels, and stained glass. Wooden details were painted in two or three different colours, usually dark colours such as maroon, buff or olive. The brick might have been painted for protection, especially if it were Figure 14 - (Warzecha, 2014) House Toronto's soft orangey-red brick (often a darker located in the Madison Avenue. red colour to make it resemble more expensive hard brick).

Henry Hobson Richardson, known as one of America’s greatest architects, created a version of the Romanesque so distinctive and personal that buildings inspired by his designs have come to be called Richardsonian Romanesque (Figure 15). The style

19

was first used in Toronto for the Parliament Building in 1886 designed by Buffalo architect Richard A. Waite. This was followed in the next decade by all types of buildings in the weighty and massive-looking style, notably by Toronto architects David Dick, E. J. Lennox, David Roberts, and William Storm.

Richardsonian Romanesque buildings have a massive shape, either symmetrical or asymmetric, often with a tower (Figure 15). Cladding is usually in ashlar, sometimes with red brick. Figure 15 - The Broadview Hotel. Roofs are high with broad planes. Entries are usually round-arched and deep. Decorative elements include stone columns and the stone or terracotta foliate ornamentation called Byzantine leafwork.

For the Lewis Lukes house of 1888-90, E. J. Lennox combined the rock-faced ashlar and solid appearance of Richardsonian Romanesque with the asymmetry and picturesque detail of Queen Anne (Figure 16). The result was a hybrid form that was soon copied for single and double houses throughout Toronto's neighbourhood called the Annex and elsewhere in the city.

Figure 16 - (Mirvish+Gehry Toronto, 2015a) The earliest example of an Annex Style house can be found at 37 Madison Ave. in Toronto.

Other styles as the Second Classical Revival, Late Gothic Revival or Neo-Gothic, Georgian Revival or Neo-Georgian, Neo-Tudor or Jacobethan somehow marked the evolution of the city of Toronto, although have not impacted as strongly as the examples already mentioned before. Therefore, rather than describe each one of these styles I have decided to include solely in the follow timeline (Figure 17) to have a sense of their insertion in the city's time framework.

20

Figure 17 - Timeline illustrating the Victorian House Styles throughout 19th/20th centuries in Toronto.

21

22

As high-rise condominiums towers are constructed throughout Toronto’s downtown core, the pressure to redevelop sites that contain low-rise structures has greatly increased. Many of these sites contain heritage houses that have survived for more than a century but are now at risk of being demolished. This is an important concern for urbanists, as the city’s unique style of domestic architecture is disappearing from the urban scene. One of these cases is the Bay-and-Gable (Bay n’ Gable or Bay-n-Gable) houses, which in the 19th century were highly popular in Toronto’s residential neighbourhoods.

The typical Victorian houses that we can see throughout the city were a practical response to the housing needs of Torontonians. Taxes on homes were determined according to the width of the building lot (the property’s frontage on the street). As a result, builders subdivided lots, creating ones that were only 13-20 feet wide, but often 150 feet deep. Architects responded by designing homes to accommodate these narrow lots, as the Bay-and-Gable typology. The earliest such house that I have discovered in Toronto was built in 1870 (Weir, 2016).

Bay-and-Gable houses, were tall and narrow, extending a considerable distance back from the street. Consulting the Archives of Ontario (Ministry of Government and Constumer Services, 2012) as a reference, it was impossible to verify who actually designed the first of these houses, but Patricia McHugh in her book “Toronto Architecture - A City Guide” (McHugh and Bozikovic, 2017), suggests that it was likely David B. Dick. The style spread from Toronto to many cities and towns throughout Ontario. Some were also built in western Canada.

These homes were not only practical, but caught the imagination of the public, which viewed them as resembling the upper-class homes of earlier decades, even though they were on a much smaller scale. It didn’t take long time before they were common in many neighbourhoods, especially in Cabbagetown, Cork Town, along College Street, in Trinity Bellwoods, Parkdale, St. Andrew’s Ward, Roncesvalles, the Annex, and Don Valley.

Prior to the Bay-and-Gables, houses with bay windows on the first floor were already common throughout the New England States and Canada’s maritime provinces. These homes were usually built of wood, but in Toronto they were of brick. Today, they are sometimes referred to as “half Bay and Gable.”

Those that have Mansard roofs are in the Second Empire style. There is a row of them on Draper Street, in the Spadina/King area.

Unlike houses with bay windows in other cities, Toronto’s Victorian houses have contained bay windows either only on ground level or from the ground-floor level to the second and often the third storeys. The bay windows occupied half of their facades, and were not only attractive, but like the style itself, very practical. They increased the amount of daylight entering the houses in an era without electric lighting, and facilitated a better flow of air inside the rooms. This was important when smoky fireplaces were employed

23

for heating, iron stoves for cooking, and chamber pots for nightly necessities. Odors from the rear of the home, created by backhouses and stables, often entered the houses. The large bay windows and the 11’ or 12’ ceilings allowed air within the rooms to circulate more freely.

Narrow Victorian houses were affordable for middle-class families. They were rarely built as detached homes, but rather in pairs or as row housing. The height of popularity for the style was mainly between 1875 and 1890. Although they closely resembled each other, their trim and architectural detailing on their roofs varied greatly. They possessed elements of the Italianate and Gothic in the bargeboard trim on the peaked roofs. Stained glass windows were sometimes inserted in the transom windows above the doors. Most of them were built of bricks that were red, yellow or white from Toronto brickyards, although a few were constructed of wood. In the grander homes, terracotta tiles were often inserted into the facades for decorative detailing. Such homes possessed larger lots and possessed as well considerably more street frontage.

On the ground-floor levels of the homes, parlours3 usually occupied the front space facing the street. Dining rooms were in the centre position, and kitchens at the rear (Figure 18). The parlours often had medallions on the ceilings and ornate crown plaster mouldings. The bedrooms were on the second storey, with an extra bedroom on the third floor.

Figure 18 - Langley and Burke architectural drawings of Today, Victorian homes are very William Elliott residence in Toronto, Ontario. From popular amongst people who wish to live Archives of Ontario. in heritage houses. Their interiors are often gutted and refurbished to suit the modern era. Interior walls are sometimes removed to create large open spaces. However, the facades are usually not altered, but when they are adapted for offices and restaurants, the lower portions of the facades are often obscured. The style has also been replicated by modern builders and appears as row houses on such streets as Weston Road, north of St. Clair Avenue (Figure 19).

The efforts to maintain this style have been reduced, although the study here is an opportunity to preserve Toronto’s original and truly unique style of domestic architecture.

3 The name to designate the reception or public spaces in the Victorian House. Usually, this space coincided with the room contained the bay window.

24

Figure 19 - Row houses at Weston Road built using Victorian Houses as a reference

Trinity-Bellwoods neighbourhood was chosen for this study due to its importance in the history of Toronto. Currently, this neighbourhood has a population of 16,556, which represents a density of 9,570 people per square kilometer. However, that a reduction of 1.5% of population was noted by census 2016 when comparing with 2011 (Statistics Canada, 2016). This could be a reflection of soaring house prices and the expensive life style of people seeking to live here. An interesting fact of this area is that the Portuguese language is the second most predominant mother tongue in the neighbourhood, only overtaken by the English, which is why it is not a surprise to seen it called “Little Portugal”.

Housing statistics shows a total number of 7,562 private dwellings within the neighbourhood, where 10% are semi- detached houses and 13% row houses, both valued above the average percentage for the city (Figure 20). Most of these two types are Victorian houses, which explains the option of choosing the Trinity- Figure 20 - (Statistics Canada, 2016) Reference values Bellwoods neighbourhood as the case released by "Census 2016". study.

There is no considerable history of the Trinity-Bellwoods area prior to John Graves Simcoe’s4 arrival. He was an English army officer and colonial administrator that became famous by idealizing a new theory of colonization. He lobbied the British Government in order to be appointed as the Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada, because he wanted to put his theories into practice (Wilson, 2013). Part of his plan was

4 John Graves Simcoe was a British Army general and the first Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada from 1791 until 1796 in southern Ontario and the watersheds of Georgian Bay and Lake Superior. He founded York (one of the cities that had formed the city of Toronto) and was instrumental in introducing institutions such as courts of law, trial by jury, English common law, and freehold land tenure, and also in the abolition of slavery in Canada.

25

to create an aristocracy in Upper Canada by giving thousands of acres to men who he believed had the potential of forming the new aristocracy in Upper Canada.

The history of the Trinity- Bellwoods neighbourhood begins with the construction of Dundas Street. The Dundas Street we know today only came into being in 1917 when a number of different roads were connected to create a continuous street from Ossington to Kingston road. Before then, Dundas Street started at the Queen Street Mental Health Centre and ran north along Ossington to the present Dundas Street where it turned and headed northwest. Dundas Street was one of the strategic military roads planned by Governor Simcoe. Before the opening of this street, the Trinity- Figure 21 - (Harstone, 2005) Sketch map showing the Park Lots, Bellwoods area was only reached by and the early intersection of Dundas and Queen Street. canoe through Garrison Creek or by foot, on a path through the woods.

A sketched map from approximately 1820 (Figure 21), shows different park lots created by Simcoe as a settlement strategy, that were later converted into the Trinity- Bellwood’s neighbourhood, (Park Lots 21 to 25). Across the decades, these lots have known several different owners. The first owner was Aeneas Shaw, a soldier who served with Simcoe during the American Revolutionary War, and built the first house in the Park Lot 23, a farmhouse in Oakhill, dated 1810 and demolished in 1883.

James Givins, an Irish emigrant who fought in the British side during the American Revolution, in 1802, purchased Park Lot 23 to the west of Oakhill. Shortly after the purchase, he built a large home for his family that he called Pine Grove (Figure 22). The house was at the north end of Givins Street, approximately where 28 Halton stands today. It was a large log building designed and built by Figure 22 - (Harstone, 2005) A sketch of the Pine Grove, William Berczy, who was built in 1802 by Col. James Givins and one of Toronto's oldest homes. responsible for many buildings in York5. Eric Arthur noted that the front of the house had a typical Georgian design with two windows on each side of the

5 William Berczy’s remarkable career as an artist, architect, contractor and land developer is documented in Berczy (Allodi, Mary Macaulay, Peter N. Moogk, Beate Stock, Rosemarie L. Towell, 1991). He was in London between 1799 and 1801 and returned to York in early June 1802. The timing of his return fits with the construction of Pine Grove.

26

central door. However, the back of the house was more picturesque than other houses built in York during the first quarter of the nineteenth century. The design of Pine Grove was innovative for York and Canada at this time.

After his death, the farm was subdivided and sold. Only the block bounded by Shaw, Halton, Dundas and Ossington, which contained Pine Grove, was kept by the family6. After being sold to different investors, Pine Grove ended up in the hands of William Levack in 1891, a wealthy meat packer living on Givins’ street, who demolished the building and built 28 Halton Street in 1892.

Today, 28 Halton (Figure 23) seems out of place: it is an enormous house in the midst of a neighbourhood of modest homes. However, but in 1885, it was one of the eight large mansions in the area between Lippencott, Bloor, Dufferin and Queen. The other mansions were Gore Vale, Dovercourt at the north end of Lakeview, Hayden Park at the southwest corner of Dovercourt and St. Anns Road, Rusholme on Figure 23 - Victorian house at 28 Halton Street, currently occupied by Rusholme Road, Foxley Maynard Nursing Home. Grove on the east side of Dovercourt, south of Dundas, The Hall on Bathurst, south of Dundas, and The Willows on the site of the Toronto Western Hospital. Of these eight stately homes only 28 Halton remains; the rest have been torn down and redeveloped as schools, hospitals or parks. 28 Halton stands as a reminder of the time when there was aristocracy in estates dotting the city of Toronto.

During the first decades of the neighbourhood sprawl, other important houses as yet not mentioned, were built to mark the land introducing the various styles of Victorian houses, such as The Farr House (1847) combining Georgian design with features usually associated with the Classical Revival Style; or The Cornell House (1872), a two-storey L- shaped stuccoed house built in the Gothic Revival Style. In addition to all these houses deriving from the same style, their facades were mostly clad using wood logs.

In 1803, Duncan Cameron (Jennifer, 1988) created his own mark in the neighbourhood and brought a different concept of housing by building a Georgian house with brick named Gore Vale (Figure 24). This house followed the English “picturesque villas” buildings. This architectural style, which evolved out of 18th century romanticism, was concerned with creating an image similar to a picture of a country house. It was essential that the house be set back from the road, situated amidst trees, and have a wonderful view of the countryside. Gore Vale met all the requirements for a stylish picturesque villa and for many years was the only brick building west of Toronto, at that time known as the town of York.

6 James Givins died on March 5, 1846. The executors of his will surveyed the property in July 1854, but Plan 194 which subdivided the estate was not registered until February 23, 1857.

27

In 1870, when Edward Oscar Bickford bought Gore Vale, it was 50 years old and in need of major renovations. Bickford undertook a series of improvements which turned a secluded picturesque villa into an imposing Victorian mansion. He raised the main house and built a basement beneath it. He added a third floor with a mansard roof to the main house and the east wing. A one-storey conservatory was built on the west Figure 24 - (Lost Toronto, 2013) The corner of Queen West side. The stables were enlarged and and Gore Vale, looking north west with Gore Vale house in given a second storey. In short, Gore the distance. Vale was completely rebuilt and, with over 10,000 square feet of livable floor area, it was one of the largest private homes in Toronto.

Bickford wanted to make an impression. Gore Vale was rebuilt in the Second Empire style which is characterized by the use of mansard roofs. Popular between 1860 and 1885, many of the most important public and private buildings in Toronto were built in the Second Empire style during this time.

Development cycles impact the growth of cities around the world, and for the City of Toronto there is no exception. This is easily identified when analyzing the speculative housing history. A building boom is always followed by a crash and then, a gradual recovery. This cycle repeats itself over and over again. Large amounts of speculative housing is built during the boom years, and almost nothing is built during the crash that follows.

An understanding of the development cycles makes it easier to comprehend how the community evolved, and why certain types of houses were built. Speculative builders were not interested in architecture; they wanted to build as many houses as possible, very quickly and cheaply, so they used standard designs. This is why there is an enormous architectural consistency among the houses built during a real estate boom.

The Bay-and-Gable house, which for many people represents the Victorian House of Toronto, was in vogue during the boom of 1887 to 1890. During this four year period, almost all the Bay-and-Gable houses of Toronto were built.

28

The boom and bust cycle only affected the speculative housing. Custom houses, built on a one-off basis for the middle class, were built irrespective of the economic cycles. These homes are individualistic, and reflect the tastes of their owners and architects. They are often the most interesting houses, from a design perspective, in the community. Figure 25 - (Harstone, 2005) Construction activity table of In Trinity-Bellwoods, the Crawford and Shaw streets. custom houses stand out, not only because they were designed by architects, but also because they are larger than a typical home, and were built with higher quality building materials.

Most of the houses in the Trinity-Bellwoods community were speculatively built, following the pattern of boom and bust. The Graphic in Figure 25 reflects the number of houses built each year in the neighbourhood. It shows that 70% of the houses were built during one of the booms, and almost half the houses were built between 1887 and 1890 (Figure 26), which gives the community its Victorian character. However, a significant number of houses were built between 1899 and 1907, especially on Crawford Street, between Lobb and Dundas Streets.

During the last half of the 19th century, over 75% of Toronto families lived in rental housing. However, between 1875 and 1885, almost half of the houses in the Trinity- Bellwoods neighbourhood were owner-occupied (Doucet and Weaver, 1991). These houses were self-built by the owners themselves without paid professional help. Immigrants, who came to Canada to take advantage of free farmland, built their own houses with the help of friends and neighbours.

Immigrants of urban areas often had less money. They bought cheap land on the outskirts of the City, and built a one-storey frame building. Richard Harris described the process as follows: "A modest parcel of suburban land ... would be acquired for $10.00 down and $5.00 a month. A one-room shack, amounting to little more than a large kitchen would be run up, often at the back of the lot. The expectation was that things would improve. As the family saved money, extra lumber would be bought and rooms added. In time, if the family prospered, a new frame or even a brick home might be built on the front of the lot and the old dwelling torn down, rented or turned into a storage shed. To a considerable extent the process depended on self-help.”7

Before 1885, the self-built, one-storey cottage was the most common house in the Trinity-Bellwoods neighbourhood. In January 1885, 13 of the 30 houses on Shaw Street were one-storey frame cottages, the hallmark of the self-built house.

7 Harris 1996. One of the major themes of this book is the role of 'self-built' housing in the development of Toronto's suburbs.

29

Figure 26 - (Harstone, 2005) Table of building cycles variation in Toronto.

After 1885, a land in the Trinity-Bellwoods area was too expensive and new immigrants preferred to settle beyond the City limits, north of Bloor Street, where it was possible to buy cheap land and to self-build their first home in Canada.

During the building boom of 1875, most of the houses built were dedicated to the rental market, most likely occupied by middle-class professionals. Their design was noted to be part of the Ontario Cottage Style (Kyles, 1999). This type of house has a typical small peaked gable over the front door, and a window on each side of the door. Ontario Cottages were easy to build, and therefore, many examples survive from this period.

The real estate market collapsed towards the end of 1875. The probable causes were the Pacific Scandal and the fall of the Macdonald government, which reduced the confidence in the Canadian economy and ended the prosperity fueled by the railway development. In 1878, the real estate market started to recover, when Alfred Packham, a letter carrier, built 222 Shaw Street.

During the next two years, five one-storey frame buildings were built on Shaw Street. These houses were self-built and owner- occupied. In 1880, rental houses started to be built again. James Smith built two rental cottages on his property on Shaw Street. However, the most remarkable Figure 27 - 108 - 110 - 112 Crawford Street houses. rental project was 108-110-112 Crawford (Figure 27). Built in 1880, these houses are solid brick and three-storey high. This is in sharp contrast with the other houses on Crawford and Shaw, which were frame or rough-cast and only one-storey high. The only other similar houses in the area are on Beaconsfield, which were built at the same time8. The developer overestimated the strength of the market, and 108-110-112 Crawford remained vacant for many years, but it is interesting to note that the developer saw Crawford as a suburban street where the middle-class would want to live. These are the earliest surviving “Bay-and-Gable” houses on Crawford Street, however with no bays anymore.

8 The Beaconsfield subdivision was developed by J. Saurin McMurray, who had a hand in the development of 108-112 Crawford St. In addition to the houses on Beaconsfield, 44-54 Grove were built in 1880, these houses are a row of five two storey plus mansard solid brick houses, which are comparable to 108-112 Crawford.

30

Another development boom to be noted was between 1887 and 1890. Land prices were soaring and construction was everywhere. It was during this period that most of the Victorian houses that characterize downtown Toronto were built. Between 1887 and 1890, 56 new houses were built on one of the most important streets of the neighbourhood, Shaw Street.

Development occurred at a much higher density after 1887. Prior to 1887, over half of the houses built on the street were one-storey high, and the average developed lot was 24 feet wide. After the boom, houses were two or two-and-a-half storeys high, and the average lot was 16 feet. Some homeowners intensified the use of their land by demolishing their single houses and replacing with a couple of new smaller houses. In one instance, a land-owner replaced four one-storey houses with eleven two-storey houses.

After that, there was a significant shift from ownership to rental. In 1886, 35% of the houses on Shaw Street were owner-occupied. Between 1887 and 1890, only five of the new houses were owner-occupied. The rest were built as investment properties. By 1891, 27% of the homes on Shaw were owner-occupied. This behavior shows the change of paradigm adopted by the owners trying to intensify the use of their land.

Today it is easy to see that in the neighbourhood most of these houses have changed with time and all of them have been altered in one way or another. On the exterior, the most widespread change is the verandas - they are all additions. Almost without exception, the houses built before 1900 had a sunroom (Figure 28) or conservatory, which doubled as a porch over the front door.

Almost all of these sunrooms Figure 28 - Semi-detached houses located at Crawford Street. The best remaining examples of houses with have disappeared. A door from the front sunroom. bedroom gives access to the sunroom. Today, this door is commonly replaced with a window and the scarred brickwork painted to hide the work.

Other changes have been made to update the houses. Doors and windows have been replaced, and occasionally the house has been rebricked or given a new face. However, in most houses the initial aesthetic design remains to give a sense of the original house.

31

32

This section of the thesis will focus on understanding how Victorian houses have been able to maintain their status as a desired home and enduring trend through the years. To understand this phenomenon, it is important to comprehend which characteristics people like or dislike when they live in or buy these houses. To support and compile related information about theses house, there is no better way than collecting testimonies from those who have been living in these houses for decades, and in different situations, and how they have been transforming the houses according to constantly evolving needs.

Each person sees existing houses from a different perspective. Some are more conservative: maintaining original features, preserving the room dimensions and keeping original elements, such as doors and windows, with no alterations. Others undertake major renovations that focus on redesigning the spaces, which in most cases is done by opening interior walls and connecting different rooms, or replacing old windows and doors with better energy performing systems. In most cases, it was easy to identify a tendency to increase the house area into the backyard space by adding additional bedrooms, enlarging the kitchen or even creating lounge spaces. Most of these additions were done with modern design and construction (Figure 29).

The methodology chosen to identify those variations and verify results was a survey created to query the inhabitants of the neighbourhood selected as a case of study that was described above. To complement the survey results, intensive research of books and articles was done to find testimonies or statistics related with the survey topics that would help to corroborate the results obtained.

An important resource was the book written by Jon Harstone (Harstone, 2005), which explains the evolution of the Trinity-Bellwoods neighbourhood alongside the history of Toronto, focusing on the park and surrounding streets.

Originally, the intention was to collect a minimum of 100 samples, considering only the testimonies from owners or tenants of bay-and-gable houses, for being the typology used as a case of study, which will be described in the following chapter. Nevertheless, after collecting surveys from different dwellers of other Victorian houses typologies, I have realized a tendency towards similar responses and issues independent of the housing typology. For this reason, I have limited surveys to 25 samples.

The survey was composed of four main topics, with the objective of covering as many issues related to the experience of people living in their houses as possible. The topics were:

- General Questions; - Social Issues; - Environmental Issues ; - Construction Issues.

Naturally, some questions were easier to answer than others, and the interviewees denoted a better comprehension of the questions related to social and

33

environmental pathologies than construction pathologies. Therefore, most of the responses to this topic were obtained through a mix of the interviewees’ perception and my own site observations.

Figure 29 - Bay-and-Gable house at 178 Crawford Street. As noted, the house has been renovated along the life span.

34

In this section, a summary of each of the four topics will be provided rather than responses to individual survey questions. Graphics summarizing individual questions follow on next pages.

1 to 10 9.09% 11 to 20 9.09% 21 to 30 27.27% 31 to 40 36.36% 41 to 50 0.00% + 51 18.18%

1 to 3 54.55% 4 to 6 36.36% + 7 9.09%

Yes 90.91% No 9.09%

35

s

s

ng

Walls

Doors

Floors

Interior Interior

Ceilings

Heati

Window

Finishing

Plumbing

Structural

Insulation

Roof / Attic / Roof

Exterior Walls Exterior Air Conditioning Air

This question aimed for written answers depending on each interviewee. The intention was to understand which reasons were behind the decisions for renovations. The dominant answer was material decay and adaptation for new needs.

Yes 100.00% No 0.00%

36

Yes 36.36% No 63.64%

Yes 45.45% No 54.55%

Yes 72.73% No 27.27%

37

The dominant answer was “No”. Other answers referred the attics, steps in the corridor and kitchens as spaces that denote specific issues.

The required spaces were laundry and powder rooms. Originally, these houses were planned to have bathrooms on upper floors, leaving the main floor for living rooms, dining rooms and kitchens. Along generations, powder rooms had become a requirement for owners or buyers. Some existing houses went through renovations to introduce these spaces in main floors, other have remained unaltered.

In early stages, laundries were placed in basements. However, by necessity or random decisions, basements were converted in separated apartments, reducing the laundry space or even reallocating them to additions built in the backyard.

Leaked Windows 45.45% Cold Floors 9.09% Cold Walls 27.27% Cold Roof / Attic 18.18% None 18.18% Other 9.09%

38

Yes 72.73% No 27.27%

Yes 54.55% No 45.45%

39

Yes 90.91% No 9.09%

Cold Days 54.55% Warm Days 45.45%

Yes 54.55% No 45.45%

40

Hall

Attic

None

Stairs

Other

Master Master

Kitchen

Bedroom

Bedroom

Washroom

nd

Living Room Living

2 Dining Room Dining

Trending answer was “No”. Just one answer referred to the hydro bill as being too expensive.

Roof

None

Water Water

Others

General General

Roof Sags Roof

Nests and and Nests

Dampness Dampness

Penetration

Leaking Roof Leaking

Vermins Roof Vermins

41

r he he

And

thers

None

Damp Damp

ork o ork O

Breasts

Leaning Leaning

Damaged Damaged Roof Leak Roof Leak

or Cracked

Around t Around

Flaunching

To Chimney Chimney To Penetration Penetration

Brickw Damaged Pots Pots Damaged

r r

Brick Brick

Walls

Tiling

Npne

Mortar

Eroded Eroded

Others

Leaning Leaning

Bulging, Bulging,

Bulging, Bulging,

Defective Defective

Defective Defective

Flaking or or Flaking

Bowing o Bowing

Bowing or or Bowing

Leaning Walls Leaning

Rot Rot

Non

Rain Rain

under under

Windo

Sashes Sashes

Others

Timber Timber

Blowing Blowing are Stuck Stuck are

42

and

None

Cracks Cracks

in Lath Lath in

Others

Bulging

Ceilings

Mouldy Mouldy

Ceilings

Carcks in in Carcks

Sagging and and Sagging

Plasterboard Plasterboard

None

Noise Noise

Cracks

Others

Plaster

Surface Surface

Cracks in in Cracks

Movement Movement

Transmission

amp amp

Floor

None

D

Floors

Others

Nurse, Nurse,

Sloping Sloping

Bulging Bulging

Loose or or Loose

Concrete

Excessive Excessive

Damaged Damaged

Rotten or or Rotten

Cracked or or Cracked

Floorboard

Floor Spring Floor

Infested Floor Infested

43

44

This chapter intent to explain in detail the history behind the appearance of Bay- and-Gable style in Toronto, the constructions techniques associated with these houses and important issues occurred along their life span, addressing in the second part of the chapter to thermal calculations obtained for the original versions of this house.

Figure 30 – Illustrative map of the Bay-and-Gable houses location in the Trinity-Bellwoods Neighbourhood.

The Bay-and-Gable was chosen as a case of study because it is represented in the majority of Toronto’s neighbourhoods (Figure 30), and remains beloved by Torontonians as well as used by developers as a prototype for narrow lots and urban infill.

This type of house has succeeded throughout history because it is easily adaptable to all different classes. It started being produced with large and symmetrical versions for the upper classes, then detached or semi-detached for middle classes, ending in inexpensive mass production to attend the speculative housing for the working classes, in the second half of the nineteenth century.

Its principal characteristics that became popular amongst builders and users were: a flexible form adaptable to a variety of scales of tight urban lots, its efficient use of space, its use of local materials and its ability to be mass produced. The key characteristic was its appealing façade design that was easily created adding minor and inexpensive decorative detailing to its narrow house frontage.

From 1870 to 1900, Toronto experienced a notable sprawl of the semi-detached Bay-and-Gable house with a few common elements amongst them: front façade of two and one-half storey cladded with brick and vertical appearance; a bay window fronting the principal room on each side of ground floor; and an entrance covered by a small porch. The second floor façade is usually flat with two or three windows aligned with the doorway and bay below, although occasionally the bay continues upward to the eaves (Figure 31).

45

The main floor includes a hall plan opening onto two small or large principal room(s), normally facing front and back of the house and ending with an off-set kitchen wing at the rear, permitting light to enter the middle of the house. In all cases other than the narrowest of houses, a steep flight of stairs located in the front part of hall was the access to the second floor. This plan derived from the morphology of Toronto’s Georgian townhouses, although with a different façade appearance and substantial plan adjustment. Whereas the kitchen of the Georgian building could be placed in the basement, by 1870s it started to be located behind the house in a narrow wing connected to the backyard. Most of the time, the ceilings of this wing were lower than those of the front. The typical stair configuration included a straight run up, leading to this lowered floor above the back wing and a two-step return Figure 31 - (Weir, 2016) 418 - 420 Sackville Constructed by James Nurse, flight up to the second 1888 floor front wing.

The dimensions were adapted depending on budget and the width of the lot, which varies from a very narrow with the width between 6 and 7.5 m, in some cases having street and alley access. In many of the earliest and largest houses, there is a tendency to sprawl across the lots, affording the natural light and views in these central rooms from three different sides (Figure 32), while the majority were squeezed and designed to have the principal rooms facing solely to the front and rear due to their situation on narrow lots. Analyzing various typical plans, it is evident that the choices ranged from affordable ground floor principal rooms with considerable width, and providing a convenient hall and stairway, to others more favorable to functionality with a wide stairway and hall, resulting in narrow living rooms, Figure 32 - (Weir, 2016) Example of large lot at 180-282 Carlton, narrowed further by the allowing side windows to lighten the centre rooms. Normally, the addition of a projecting windows would only appear on front and rear facades. mantle.

46

The deep lots varied from 27 m to 45 m deep with the most common size being 5.5 m by 39.5 m (Weir, 2016). For the houses, the dimensions ranged from 4 m to 4.5 m, with formal rooms facing the front and lane ways, privies and stables located in the rear. The strategy to create comfortable spaces even in narrow lots was to provide high ceilings with 3 m or more, a higher bay Figure 33 - (Weir, 2016) Asymmetrical pair at 24 - 26 Elgin, 1879. window facing the front, and a single window facing the rear.

These buildings became greatly efficient in narrow lots, but the width of the publicly visible portion did not usually exceed 6 m. It allowed people to purchase, with minimal investment, a building whose small façade’s Gothic references were recognizable and individualized by extra expenditure in improving detailing in some parts, including porch turnings, gable woodwork, bay window configuration, and decorative brickwork (Figure 33). In some adjacent houses built by the same contractor and closely spaced in time can be found one faced in Neo-Gothic decorative elements and roofline, and the other having a mansard roof or tower element in the same floor plan (Figure 34). The houses with these differences in the façades can be considered a variant of the Bay-and- Gable typology.

Figure 34 - (Weir, 2016) Bay-and-Gable four different Ground Floor plans widths.

47

During the nineteenth century, brick was the main cladding material in Toronto and the majority of bay-and-gable houses were fronted in either red or white brick, with red being more common after 1880.

In 1882, Oscar Wilde lectured on aesthetics in Cabbagetown’s Allan Gardens (Toronto Neighbourhood) and remarked on Toronto’s “horrid white brick with its shallow colour spoiling the effect of the architecture,” referring to newly built white brick houses fronting an important park in this neighbourhood. After he pointed out the issue, many were soon tinted to a red colour using a technique of beer wash dye, penciling in raised lime faux mortar joints, intended to hide poor workmanship. The other option used to create contrast was a combination of red brick with white voussoirs and quoins.

Masonry bonds were initially the construction method used for housing in Toronto and, by consequence, important for the emergence of Bay-and-gable houses. Before 1860, the favourite brick for fine buildings was Flemish bond, described as a “complex and extensive method of bonding solid masonry walls that created a distinct pattern of alternating headers and stretchers on the exterior” (Weir, 2016). The headers usually defined with short ends of the brick laid perpendicular to the wall to tie it together, and stretchers with the long side of brick laid parallel to the direction of the wall face. Between 1870s and 1904, the builders changed the construction method for “clipped brick” (City of Toronto, 1904), in which the “outward-facing end of the header brick would be cut in a forty-five-degree angle to allow for it to be invisibly concealed in a wall, behind a stretcher brick that had also had a corner removed on a forty-five-degree angle” (Weir, 2016). This method allowed sets of decorative contrasting elements, as white brick patterns against red brick, just by providing a visually uniform face comprised of stretcher bond.

As a structure, the custom brick walls were replaced by balloon framing from the 1870s onward. This change was a response to speculative housing looking for efficient methods that could allow for mass production of houses. Standard sizes of framing were combined with mass produced nails reducing Figure 35 - (Weir, 2016) House on Berkeley undergoing facade reconstruction, showing the wood plank backing. the needs of shaping and handwork required on site by carpenters (Figure 35). This method permitted faster construction of houses in addition to reducing the cost. Soon it was perceptible that this solution would be a good alternative to solid building, and brick started to be used on public buildings’ façades with the wood-framed side and rear walls attached to row or detached existing buildings often covered in a lime render stucco. The typical wall assembly of this method was usually of two by four wood studs, covered with 50 mm boards on the outside and furring strips and then lath and stucco or veneer on the inside.

48

Usually, the lime render on the sides was a temporary measure used by builders to carry through until the building was sold, and the exposed foundation anticipating that the sides could be clad with brick whether the new owner would afford it or not.

As a conclusion, the emergence of the Bay-and-gable occurred because of different impacts on urban form of Toronto. The most important was a response to maintain the traditional features of Neo-Gothic elements overlaid onto a common Georgian plan type usually used on expensive houses to face a speculative housing intended to appeal to the working and middle-class (Figure 36).

Figure 36 - (Weir, 2016) A row of eight substantial houses at 410-432 Dundas Street, 1884, constructed in series rather than paired mirror image units. Scott Weir, 2015.

This part of the study will focus on demonstrating in detail the issues observed in the subject houses, using not only the survey previously described but also analyzing older projects found at Archives of Ontario and various public documents released over the last century. The importance of cross referencing information provided by dwellers with the technical research initially done (such as assembly type and insulation strategies used in early age) became crucial to conclude which areas and components of the houses would require more attention when deciding to renovate a Victorian house.

The survey revealed important testimony from owners of the various issues that could exist in these houses. Some of the most frequently mentioned issues are described below, followed by their potential causes:

As noted at various points in this document, these houses were most likely built as row or semi-detached construction, where the roofs have more area exposed to external conditions in comparison to façades. Front and back yard façades are often in contact with exterior conditions and sides converted into demising walls, avoiding the loss of energy. With ineffective roof insulation, all the heat can be lost through the roof by stack effect. Most likely, heat loss in older houses is mainly by lack of insulation in the roof/attic.

49

The thermal amplitude noted between London and Toronto led to changes in style to adapt houses to the colder climate and relativize the house behavior during hotter days. New strategies for walls and roof assemblies were developed mainly to address the cold. The most noted strategy for cooling down interior spaces during the summer, aside from air conditioning, has been promoting cross ventilation through taking advantage of windows positions. However, as can be seen in the wind statistics for Toronto during the warmest months of July and August 2017 (Figure 37), the predominant wind direction is South-North, which makes cross ventilation less effective in regular Victorian houses in Toronto, very often oriented Northeast-Southwest.

At same time, and according to projections for Ontario (Colombo et al., 2007), the average summer temperature in Toronto will increase 5-6°C by 2100. This is increasingly becoming a concern when renovating an existing house and is giving rise to the need for new solutions to be created in order to address effects of climate change such as this.

Figure 37 - (Windfinder, 2018) Statistics based on observations taken between 02/2007 - 03/2018 daily from 7am to 7pm local time, in the Toronto Island Airport.

Therefore, it is not difficult to grasp why dwellers expressed to feel more comfortable in their houses during the winters than summers when answering the survey. This is related with more affordable and efficient systems to warm houses during the winter when comparing with system options to cool down during the summer, available in Canada.

Due to the deep configuration of these houses, a lack of natural light in interior spaces can be an issue. Stairs and dining rooms located typically in the middle of the floorplate are often the most affected spaces on the ground floor, while upstairs it is the washrooms and halls that are most affected. The high Victorian windows in the front and back façades are not sufficient to clearly illuminate the depth of the floorplate. In the basement, small casement windows provide insufficient natural light only compensated by artificial lights.

50

Figure 38 - Floor plans of Victorian House located at 267 and 269 Sherbourne Street.

For some dwellers, the strategy they took to bring natural light inside was to remove interior walls, usually on the ground floor, and combine areas like the parlour and dining room into one space (Figure 38). At the same time, the entrance hall and corridor are often opened to the living room, thus enabling the natural light to reach these interior areas. The disadvantage of using this strategy is the difficulty in heating the referred spaces. Previously, each space would be individually heated, but by turning the ground floor into a wide-open space the hot air escapes along the floors above instead of getting “trapped” in the spaces. However, this option allows for better cross-ventilation, helping to cool down the house during the summer. Recently, skylights over stairs has become more common in renovations, bringing natural light into the middle of floorplate.

Wood sash windows were the general rule in Victorian times because their masterful engineering allows a room to be ventilated very effectively. The sash was a clever piece of engineering that allowed a room to be ventilated very effectively. The raised bottom half allows cool, fresh air to enter, while the opened top half lets the warmer, stale air escape. With time, however, water eventually penetrates into the wood and causes deterioration and consequent leaking. Sills and lower frames are especially vulnerable and can be seen when the wood is soft and spongy. In doors, deterioration due to damp is usually localized. Often just the base of a doorframe is rotten or decaying along the very bottom edge of Figure 40 - One example of the door (Figure 39). Also, Aluminum Storm Window in a repeated painting causes Victorian House. windows to get stuck. The hollowed area set for the weights in the frame gets especially cold. These windows do not seal properly and are usually single panel. People add Figure 39 - (Rock, 2015) Rotten window storm windows which changes the aesthetics (Figure caused by water infiltration. 40).

51

A different number of causes can be attributed to defective mortar phenomena. Most often it is due to frost acting on the moisture trapped between the mortar and the wall. It can also occur with differential movement of the wall, incorrect mortar mix or even physical damage. The eroded brick defect can occur by frost action or salt crystals forming in the brick, or excessive weathering, old age, or poor-quality masonry (Figure 41).

Figure 41- (Rock, 2015) Defective Wall Mortar and Eroded Wall Brick.

Among the issues that could affect a roof are the flacking surfaces due either to age or poor quality of materials, allowing water to be absorbed and to freeze and expand. Defective flashing is often seen along roofs. However, due to extreme cold during the winter, Ice Dams (Figure 42) are by far the most frequent cause of leaking in roofs.

Figure 42 - (Aponte, 2004) Ice Dams.

This phenomenon is attributed to large masses of ice that collect typically on the lower edge of a roof and in the gutters. As melting snow (or rain) runs down the roof, it meets this ice mass and backs up, sometimes under the shingles and then leaking into the attic.

52

While researching in preparation for this document, there was a notable lack of information in many cases regarding the construction methodologies used for the Victorian house style adapted to Toronto. As referenced earlier, the different climates of Britain and Canada suggest differing or adapted construction methods even for the same architectural styles, such as the Victorian Style being naturally more conservative in Canada, where temperatures can reach -40°C.

This assumption disappeared immediately once I started comparing construction details of the houses in London and the same houses in Toronto. There are more similarities than differences. The predominant differences between Toronto and UK design are related to snow. The concerns about its accumulation, and consequently snow load and ground frost or frost lines, ruled different uses of spaces and aesthetic directions to Torontonian’ houses when comparing with originals.

Figure 43 - (University of the West of England, 2009) Section of typical Victorian houses in different cities. On left, a house located in London and on right, o house in Toronto.

Houses in Toronto have steeper roofs to avoid higher snow loads and the frost line is usually deeper than those in London (Figure 43). For the London related, textbooks from the 1930s suggest that foundations should be 3 feet deep (0.90 m), which in fact is not much different from today (University of the West of England, 2009). In Toronto, the frost line sits at 4 feet (1.20 m) minimum, which allowed builders to gain extra area underground and take advantage of the necessary excavation to place the footings and foundations and build the basement. Initially, this extra area was used for coal or wood storage and not considered a living space. Recently, these basements have been renovated and used by current owners, sometimes as additional apartments that are then rented for extra income.

Another difference is noted on the exterior wall backup structure. In the British model, walls built in Flemish bond or Garden wall bond are often seen until the end of the 19th century. Walls formed by two layers of brick with a cavity in between, enabling a better resistance to cold, was a solution that emerged by the early 1900s. Later, the interior layer of concrete block changed, which brought a better U-value.

In Toronto, during a long period prevailed a double brick wall option with lath and plaster as interior finish; however, the use of wood studs as a backup became the preferred system in housing construction early in the 20thcentury. The reason behind this is the significant increase in energy performance of the wall when replacing the concrete backup with wood studs (Symposium et al., 2013).

53

The following describes in greater detail the structure of each component of the Torontonian Victorian house envelope (Figure 44). From foundations to the roof, the attempt to comprehend the wisdom behind each solution will be important to calculate the energy effectiveness of the original house without any improvements or modern insulation methods. This information will be important to use as data to run thermal resistance calculations in the HOT2000 software.

Most characteristic feature: strong vertical emphasis in which the lines of the bay, together with the narrow openings, draw the eye to the crowing gable and its vigorous display of carved gableboard and supporting brackets.

Typical two or Variations: Half-Bay- four-light sash and-Gable: windows - The bay fronts only the ground floor; Half-glazed paneled - Often capped by an open fretwork dwart and transomed parapet; entrance doors - Many example in which the bay is absent.

Figure 44 - (Cabbagetown Heritage Conservation District Committee, 2018) Bay-and-Gable house description by Cabbagetown Preservation Association.

Foundations are usually built with older rubble, brick or stone (Figure 45) as their antecessors, although often uneven, without footings, and varying in depth and thickness. They were rarely damp- proofed or insulated, some have an interior drainage path, and all have a high mortar content, which can absorb water from the soil. These foundation walls would go deeper than 4 feet (1.20 m) and by raising the main floor Figure 45 - (Aponte, 2004) Stone Ruble foundation wall on by 1.00 m, would allow for a room left side. Brick foundation wall on right side. below with 2.10 m to 2.20 m clear headroom.

The most common exterior wall assembly is the framed walls, usually with 2x4 in wood stud and an uninsulated cavity. Different construction techniques determine the size of the cavity. A frame house with a brick veneer usually has a 1 to 2 in. (25 to 50 mm)

54

air space between the bricks and the frame wall as part of the drainage plane. Other types that can be found include solid walls, built of brick, stone or wood plank (Figure 46). Many solid walls, including double brick walls, have a small cavity, generally less than 1 in. (25 mm), which is a drainage plane that collects and drains water out of the wall. This solution offered better weather protection and improved thermal insulation. The two halves of the wall were tied at regular intervals with steel or wrought iron wall ties. The external leaf of brickwork was laid in facing bricks, the internal leaf in commons.

Figure 46 - (University of the West of England, 2009) Four examples of exterior walls built for Victorian Houses. First two, examples of early cavity walls and cast iron used in UK, and last two, the Torontonian double brick wall with lath and plaster, and wood stud wall with siding. Note that floor headers are a part of the envelope that usually are not insulated. They are called the joist header, rim joist space, foundation header space or simply the joist space. This is the area where the floor joists intersect and are supported by the foundation walls. It is prone to air leakage and is seldom properly insulated, resulting in heat loss, dust and pollen entry and vermin access.

The techniques and materials used to build roofs followed the experience brought from England. The typical Bay-and-Gable roof is traditionally pitched, clad initially with natural slates and later with asphalt shingles that emerged in America in the early 1900s. The roof configuration goes along with the layout of the house, which in its classic form was divided into the main roof, gable above the bay and rear roof. The main roof lays over the bedrooms and landing and comprised a series of sloping timbers known as rafters fixed at the top to a ridge board, and at the bottom to a wall plate.

It is often seen that the main roof was built as an accessible attic or one-and-a-half- storey more than a truss or cathedral attic (Figure 47). The gable has its own small wood structure. The rear roof is normally above the small back room, which is usually the kitchen, and aesthetically compared as a back addition was often gabled, sometimes hipped or simply comprised of a single lean-to roof slope.

Using the same strategy of exterior walls, the roofs and attics relied on constant ventilation to preserve the wood structure. The air passing through the battens and roof timbers helped to reduce the risk of decay by allowing any moisture that got in to dry out again and evaporate. Originally, the roofs were not insulated accounting for at least 25% of heat loss of the house (Rock, 2015). The risk of adding insulation today is that they can stop air circulating and consequently trap moisture in between rafters and battens leading to the rotting of structures.

55

One-and-a-half- Accessible Attic Cathedral/flat roof/mansard Figurestorey 47 - (Aponte, 2004) Types of Attics.

Bay windows were the Victorian must-have fashion accessory. Projecting bays could catch sunlight, attract fresh air, and allow a good view of the street. The sash windows (Figure 48) system was commonly used for most of the rooms of Victorian houses, excepting small casement windows to some WC’s and basements. In kitchens, the windows were often set as high as possible for the most efficient ventilation, as the big open ranges for cooking generated high amounts of heat. Traditionally, windows only had one sheet of glass divided into small panes with timber or metal glazing bars. Later, a new technique to produce larger sheets was developed, known as sheet glass, and became common in mainstream housing from mid-Victorian period.

Some houses can have a secondary glazing, as an independent system of windows fitted on inside of the existing window that can boost thermal insulation, seal draughts and reduce noise.

Originally, windows would have two or four-light sash windows.

Figure 48 - Example of sash windows with sheet glass.

Exterior doors were often built with solid panels, denoting a half-glazed panel on top to enable natural light into the entrance hall. Despite this functionality, the glass also became a weak point in terms of energy efficiency. The most common problems seen with doors are loose joints, rotten bottom rail and sticking doors. These cause accumulation of moisture inside the door and impede draught proofing, letting in cold air and causing slow heat loss.

56

The Figure 49 shows an analysis of heat loss in a Victorian Bay-and-Gable house calculated by HOT2000, which calculates the annual heat loss amount (MJ) for each envelope component and loss by air leakage and mechanical ventilation. For this purpose, the mechanical and air leakage was dismissed.

11,942.69 2.54

120,532.50 25.67

80,195.43 16.69

113,552.46 23.61

6,766.71 1.41

575.67 0.12

Figure 49 - Levels of heat loss in a typical Bay-and-Gable house through parts of its envelope.

The Victorian house can be considered more sustainable than modern buildings for various reasons. Normally, they were built using local sources and materials, and are easily repaired. Likewise, they have lasted a very long time. However, they lose marks when addressing thermal efficiency because of lack of insulation products available at the time they were built. Nevertheless, it is normally possible to upgrade them to meet modern thermal efficiencies due to their construction methods.

Figure 50 - Bay-and-gable Victorian house located at 200 -202 Shaw Street.

Following are the energy efficiency results obtained for an original house, broken down by envelope components and using the HOT2000 software. A semidetached house located at 200-202 Shaw Street (Figure 50) was chosen as a case of study. The house belongs to one of the survey respondents. However, just one of the houses was

57

used to generate the calculations. Each semi-detached house has 410 m2, and this will be the number to use when comparing similar houses.

One interesting thing this software can do is run individual calculation for each window. This allows us to understand the impacts of orientation and solar incidence that varies along different façades of the house.

Below are descriptions of the building parameters that were introduced in the software to obtain the results, based on construction methods referenced earlier:

Foundations: Because the software does not have an option for brick foundation wall, a concrete foundation wall and floor, with no insulation, and first-storey brick veneer placed directly on basement’s concrete walls was used instead.

Exterior Walls: Composed of solid structure, with layers of brick with 1 in (25 mm) gap in between. On interior side, lath and plaster painted finishing the wall.

Roofs: For calculation purposes, the roof was divided into the main roof and gable roof, which sits on top of the bay. The rear roof area was added to the main roof calculation. Regarding the main roof, the trusses and rafters made of wood frame, 2x10 in (50.8 x 254 mm), spaced 12 in (305mm) on center, wood board as a sheathing in between the structure and shingles on exterior side. On interior, lath and plaster as the walls. For the gable the same roof assembly was used, but with increased slope.

Windows: Window type used for this purpose was slider with sash, a single clear glass and wood frame.

Doors: All exterior doors were considered as solid wood panels.

Floor Header: Composed of solid exterior sheathing with brick on exterior side. No insulation.

In the calculations, this area was considered neither insulated nor air sealed for the original Victorian house.

Table 3 - Consumption statistics for Original Victorian House by HOT2000.

130.16 - - 11,942.69 2.54

382.72 1.09 6.19 120,532.50 25.67

107.75 0.37 2.10 80,195.43 16.69 52.46 0.18 1.02 113,552.46 23.61 6.4 0.39 2.21 6,766.71 1.41 10.88 0.90 5.11 575.67 0.12

- - - 135,988.33 28.96

58

Since the initial approach to the goals behind this dissertation, the intent has always been to focus on determining strategies to help increase the energy efficiency for existing houses and thus reduce energy consumption, thereby saving money and making homes more comfortable.

Although it is easy to apply strategies to increase energy performance, it is also risky to insulate these houses without considering the consequences of trapping moisture inside walls and causing condensation. The risk of decay on any wood structure becomes more frequent when in contact with damp insulation. The effectiveness of insulation is also reduced drastically when wet, and can even reverse its properties and soak heat out of the house.

Before identifying which strategies must be used to insulate the envelope components, it is crucial to understand how existing walls or roofs behave when adding new insulation products that were not initially assumed as part of the assembly. Aspects to consider are condensation, Figure 51 - (Official Fine Homebuilding Post, 2010) thermal bridging, ventilation and air- Illustrative example of the importance of vapour barriers tightness. to the wall.

Warming air inside creates more water vapour than cold air, and as per the vapour diffusion phenomenon, the moisture moves from areas of higher vapour pressure to areas of lower vapour pressure as well as from the warm side of an assembly to the cold side. It becomes a problem when warm air finds a way to leak from gaps in walls, floors, or roofs. Once the warm air contacts the cold surface it will cool down and condense back into water, causing damp inside the structure (Figure 51).

Some strategies can be used to address this problem. The most common is to use vapour retarders, also known as vapour barriers, which control the entry of water vapour into building assemblies by the mechanism of vapour diffusion (Lstiburek, 2004). The location of the barrier varies depending on whether it is in a cold or hot climate. In this study, we will use the cold climate strategy when vapour barriers are installed towards the interior’s warm surfaces, combined with interior air barriers, along with ventilation to dry out to exterior any of moisture that could accumulate in the assembly (Figure 52).

59

Higher Vapour Lower Vapour Pressure Pressure Cold Side of Assembly Warm Side of

Higher Air Pressure Lower Air Pressure Vapour Barrier

Figure 52 - (Lstiburek, 2004) Vapour Diffusion and Air Pressure Diagram. Location of Vapour Barrier on Cold Climates.

Dampness from condensation is also found when the insulation is thin or non-existent. In this case, the cold from outside is able to physically penetrate into the house, enabling the thermal bridging. In renovations, it is really difficult to avoid thermal bridging since it is present in any construction assembly which has different materials or components, like reveals around openings for windows and doors, and sloping upstairs ceilings near the eaves (Figure 53).

When moist, warm air meets these cold surfaces it becomes water by condensation. Therefore, it is important to address the exact insulation for each specific situation to avoid any Figure 53 - (Aponte, 2004) Wood studs gaps. It is also important to install at least the create a thermal bridge. minimum required levels according to local building codes, but these values can be exceeded where it is practical and economical.

Minimizing condensation is important to create or maintain the ventilation on the exterior side of insulation, which will prevent accumulation of water in the assembly by expelling water to the exterior.

After it rains, some exterior materials like brick absorb water, which, when in direct contact with the structure, allows migration of moisture to the interior wall. To avoid this, it is important to leave a 25 mm gap between the brick and exterior sheathing board, to allow the air to flow and remove any moisture that can stand there. On the

60

interior side, the aim is to have controllable ventilation by fitting extractor fans to kitchens and bathrooms, or simply get into the habit of opening a window for 15 minutes after showering.

These actions raise other issues like heat loss during cold days by extracting warm air to outside and relying on mechanical systems to balance the temperature inside. This is a crucial trade-off that allows the maintenance of the interior moisture at acceptable levels for human health.

A different approach other than air-tightening the house by sealing surfaces with vapour barriers is to allow the moisture to get through the walls. For older Victorian houses with solid exterior walls, letting certain amounts of air get into the wall is a good option. It is acceptable as long as the air is free to evaporate out through breathable surfaces, emulating the way old buildings deal with moisture. By using natural insulation materials that work in tune with traditional materials, such as wood-fibre boards, the moisture does not get trapped and is free to escape.

The concept behind types of insulation chosen and strategies to insulate exterior house components was a balance between reaching the target of reducing by 40% the energy consumption of an existing house (City of Toronto, 2011), and reducing the impact on the environment by consuming fewer materials and using eco-based products. Insulation was selected to balance out the greenhouse energy performance target with the drive to lower the embodied carbon.

Currently, the insulation products available in Canada’s market bounce between fiberglass and mineral wool, both with similar thermal resistance although with different environment impacts. The fiberglass is far ahead more used than the mineral wool in the construction, most likely because of its easy application, however severely damaging to the environment, which according the ICE database, has an embodied energy of 28 MJ/Kg versus 16.6 MJ/Kg of the mineral wool. It is well known that other insulation products, like cork-based products, have less impact in the environment, but as a strategy and considering the goal of developing methods than can be used in a short-term, the mineral wool was chosen as a main insulation product.

What follows is a description of strategies and materials used to improve the thermal resistance for each component of house envelope that were used to compare with values obtained from the Original Victorian house:

Foundations: As mentioned before, most of the foundation walls are part of the basement, a space initially used as a utility area was often been renovated into living space. Most Victorian houses have no insulation, leaving much potential for improvement. Insulating from outside is always best practice, but because it is not practical to excavate around the building perimeter to install insulation board, it is often necessary to insulate from the inside.

For calculations, a combination of inside and outside insulation strategies was used. One approach was to add insulation to the internal surface of the wall over their “full-height” by framing a second wall of 2x6 in (38 x 140 mm) wood studs, spaced

61

24 in (600 mm ) on center, and filling the cavity with mineral wool insulation 18.6 RSI/m (R 2.7/in)”. The top of the basement slab was insulated with low density spray foam RSI 4.4 (R25.2). The exterior surface of the wall was considered insulated to 2 ft. (0.6 m) below grade using 2 in (50 mm) EPS.

Exterior Walls: Figure 49 shows how poorly original exterior walls behave in terms of thermal resistance. These walls can be insulated from the exterior or interior side, but to keep the character of classic old building it is often opted to insulate from inside. The main concern is that adding layers of insulation can potentially act as a barrier to the natural breathing process of old walls, trapping moisture. Solid walls do not have a cavity, so the solution is to add a second wall on top Figure 54 - (Aponte, 2004) Insulating an existing of the existing wall (Figure 54), similar wall on the interior side. to the one described for basements. On framed walls, the insulation can be added to the cavity providing an energy improvement without losing interior area. The Solid wall was the option used for calculations.

To the existing brick wall was added a second wall of wood frame, 2x4 in, with studs spaced 16 in on center was filled with mineral wool 18.6 RSI/m (R 2.7/in). On interior side, the wall was finished using an insulation strapping RSI 1.4 (R8) and ½ in (12.7 mm) gypsum board.

Roofs: Attics are one of the most effective places to insulate a house as well as usually the easiest, despite the fact that most other areas, such as exterior walls or windows, lose more heat than a typical attic. Air leaks into the attic can account for substantial heat loss and can lead to a variety of moisture-related problems. One of the most important things to avoid is blocking any ventilation paths (Figure 55). It reduces the summer heat buildup, dropping the air conditioning loads, and during the winter, it ensures a colder, well-vented attic Figure 55 - (Aponte, 2004) Baffles can be space less prone to the formation of ice dams used to maintain airflow through the soffit at the eaves vents.

The same methodology was used for the main roof and gable on top of the bay. To the existing rafter cavity was added a layer of rigid insulation 3 in (76 mm) EPS, that works as a base to apply a RSI 9.0 (R 51) blown mineral wool, exact quantity to fill the left space of the cavity. On the interior side as a finishing, ½ in (12.7 mm) gypsum board painted.

62

Windows: It is usually assumed that replacing old windows for high performance UPVC (unplasticized polyvinyl chloride) or aluminum windows is the most profitable option. However, the payback period for replacing existing single panel with double glazing is generally poor (Rock, 2015). An insulated glazing unit (IGU) has a typical service life of 30 years. They are vulnerable to UV degradation and cannot be adapted and repaired like timber. Another aspect to take into account when deciding which strategy to use is that overhauling and draught-proofing original windows can reduce air leakage by 50% (Rock, 2015)(Figure 56). Fitting a secondary glazing on the inside of the existing house can achieve excellent results. This secondary layer will act as a double-glazing, which can perform equivalent to many replacement windows while preserving the houses’ original façade elements.

There is a risk attached to the option of replacing windows, which is the serious danger of damaging the historic nature of the house. So rather than replacing entire windows, a good strategy can be to overhaul and retain the existing frames but re-glazing them with special slim double-glazed units. The option most often adopted in Toronto is the total replacement.

Because the option of maintaining the existing windows by adding a secondary glazing is not available in the HOT2000, the strategy used in the energy model was to replace them with double glazed wood frame windows with Figure 56 - (Aponte, 2004) Double-hung window Low-E on surface 2 and 13 mm showing parts and air-leakage paths. argon in the gap.

Doors: Similar to the windows, the poor installation, years of hard use, shifting foundations and seasonal warping can often force hinged doors and sliding glass patio doors to become out of square with their frames, allowing draught air and moisture to get into the house at the bottom of the door. It is always less costly to buy a new wood door than being repainting or repairing the existing door constantly.

In terms of calculations, replacing existing doors for new ones made of steel, with medium density spray foam inside of the hollow part would increase the energy performance to 1.14 (R-Value) instead of 0.39 (R-Value) of a solid wood door. The strategy was to maintain the existing door, because the increment is not considered significant.

Floor/Joist Headers: This area is often overlooked during renovations. Most likely because it is difficult to access, and contractors assume that it will not impact the global heat loss.

63

For the calculations, this issue was addressed by providing filling the gap in between the joists with low density spray foam RSI 4.4 (R25.2) (Figure 57).

Figure 57 - (Aponte, 2004) Insulation the joist header area for different basement walls.

Following the results of thermal resistance and heat loss for the case of study Victorian house after applying the strategies referred above compared with Original Victorian House results:

Table 4 - Consumption statistics for Renovated Victorian House vs Original Victorian House by HOT2000.

130.16 - 11,942.69 2.54 - 5,206.17 2.34

382.72 1.09 120,532.50 25.67 3.12 38,094.99 17.12

107.75 0.37 80,195.43 16.69 8.88 4,057.38 1.82

52.46 0.18 113,552.46 23.61 0.55 37,072.82 16.66

6.4 0.39 6,766.71 1.41 0.39 6,577.39 2.95

10.88 0.90 575.67 0.12 6.08 361.51 0.16

- - 135,988.33 28.96 - 129,319.52 58.119

Comparing the heat loss results between the original Victorian and renovated one, priorities for improvement are clear. The key exterior component to upgrade is the roof - dropping the heat loss close to 15% - making this a priority intervention (Figure 58). Insulating exterior walls reduce energy loss by approximately 10%; however, the area of exterior walls on a typical bay-and-gable house to be insulated is three times more than that of the roof area, which needs a higher investment and is less desired. This assumption

9 Values calculated using HOT2000 and represents a difference between a house with no insulation and other already insulated. The absence of insulation is the reason for the enormous difference of results. Comparing with a house partial insulated would result in values close to renovated Victorian House.

64

could be true addressing only the percentages of annual heat loss, although if we also consider the amount of mega joules of energy wasted through these two components, the weight falls to the walls. It is then concluded that decisions will float between investment, efficiency and thermal comfort.

Another notable finding is the heat loss by air leakage or mechanical ventilation. The more airtight the house become, the more it relies on mechanical systems for ventilation and interior airflow to ensure healthy conditions for dwellers. Between the original and renovated version, the difference of heat loss is not substantial - less than 1.5% of total loss.

However, these percentages have an impact when comparing losses between the various components from where the heat could escape. In the original house, approximately 28% of heat is lost by air leakage / mechanical systems while in the renovated it rises close to 58%. The important finding to note is that even improving the thermal resistance through the house does not show a substantial improvement on air tightness levels. A surprising discover considering that a vapour barrier was added with insulation along the exterior walls and roofs, preventing the air from escaping, while windows were also replaced and draught-proofed. It might be related with lack of data in the software regarding the vapour barriers performances. An aspect that must be improved.

Table 5 - Comparison of thermal residence by component: Original Victorian House vs Renovated Victorian House

0.37 2 8.88 50 2300 1.09 6 3.12 18 186 0.39 2 0.39 2 0 0.18 1 0.55 2 155 0.9 5 6.08 35 576 0.37 2 0.39 2 0 0.18 1 0.46 2 83

The improvement in energy efficiency of the house after the renovation was 1,029,664.41 MJ, or a decrease of 85% of total annual energy.

Figure 58 - Comparison of heat loss: Original Victorian House and Renovated Victorian House.

65

66

As I researched and came to better understand how Victorian houses behave in different climates (United Kingdom vs Canada) in order to find strategies to adapt them for current requirements, additional lines of inquiry began to cross my mind. One additional area to explore would be the comparison of the energy performances for different houses in a graphical form that can be easily understood by any person. The current comparison options to address energy performance is strictly to link results by component, which means that exterior walls RSI must be compared with other walls, roofs with roofs and so on.

Most insulation products available in the market discloses their nominal RSI, but when installing them in a building, that wall, ceiling or floor will not have the same effective insulation value. As an example, when installing a non-interrupted layer of R-20 (RSI=3.50) fiberglass batts along the wall, it might become an R-20 (RSI=3.50) wall. However, walls are composed of other materials like wood studs, brick cladding, or gypsum board which can increase or reduce the RSI depending on whether these components have higher or lower thermal conductance. The denomination of Effective RSI was created for this purpose, which reflects exactly what the thermal resistance of that specific wall is. In many building codes the requirement for building components expresses mandatory value for effective R-value (or RSI) rather than nominal (Aponte, 2004). The further calculations will use only effective values, so that the final results obtained would be more effective.

The following will describe the three ideal methods for obtaining an overall house RSI, connecting all of the envelope components like foundations, roof, exterior walls, windows and doors, and raise a number that will characterize the overall RSI of the house, allowing for easy comparison between different construction in terms of thermal resistance.

This methodology can be designated as the individual thermal performance for each part of the envelope. The principle behind the option was calculating the impact that each exterior wall, window and roof would have in the total area of envelope. Using the mean value principals and RSI of each part, it would be possible to get a number, which will represent the hypothetical performance of the house. And so, the RSI of individual component is multiplied by the percentage area of this specific component related with the total envelope area. After that, all these RSI values combined results in the final RSI.

67

Below, a formula that can explain the procedure:

RSItotal is the final RSI value combining the individual RSI values per component, RSIcom is the effective thermal resistance of an exterior component (i.e. windows, exterior walls, roofs, etc., Acom is the area of the specific component, Aenv is the total area of the house envelope.

This second method is based on a method used to calculate framing walls called RSI parallel, which is the parallel heat flow portion of the Isothermal Planes method as described in ASHRAE Fundamentals 2009. The original method consists of calculating the effect of thermal bridging of the framing members, and the resulting parallel heat flow paths through the framing and cavity insulation. Adapting the same principal to this study, the calculation is based on the sum of the dividing component area by RSI of respective component. It results, similar to the first method, in a percentage of each component RSI according to its area in the envelope. Because this method provides an accurate effective thermal resistance of the frame-cavity component of assemblies (the part which contains both framing members and cavity insulation), the intent was to understand whether it would be possible to establish the same relation between walls, windows, roofs, etc. by considering, for example, the windows / doors as “wood framing” and exterior walls as “cavity insulation”.

See below the adapted formula for this case.

RSItotal is the final RSI value combining the individual RSI values per component, RSIcom is the effective thermal resistance of an exterior component (i.e. windows, exterior walls, roofs, etc., Acom is the area of the specific component.

This last methodology was created by using the same principles of the first option and data extracted from the HOT2000. Instead of calculating by individual component, the change was calculated by assembly, which means that the RSI used would be the overall RSI of walls, divided by total area of exterior walls, the roof RSI divided by total area of roof, and so on. This method is very similar to first one and also relies on formulas and methods used to create the HOT2000 and is consequently less manageable in term of variations of options. In other words, this option became strict to HOT2000 users. It would be interesting to experiment using other software that would provide RSI value depending on the assemblies used and compare those results with values on HOT2000,

68

to determine accuracy. However, for the time being, we will only use the HOT2000 calculations to compare with values obtained using methods 1 and 2.

Below, the formula used for this case.

RSItotal is the final RSI value combining the RSI values per assembly, RSIass is the effective thermal resistance of an exterior assembly (i.e. overall windows, overall exterior walls, overall roofs, etc., Acom is the area of the specific assembly, Aenv is the total area of the house envelope.

The table (below provides the different results according to each method, and at same time divides the results by RSI and consequently converting to R-Value, which is the unit more currently used in Canada.

Table 6 - Comparison of results from different methods to calculate House RSI.

0.88 5 4.53 23 358

0.88 5 2.56 14 188

0.78 5 4.53 25 417

Results seemed to be equivalent regardless of the approach, which corroborates the methodologies used and can be a starting point to develop a formula that could be used in further applications and to use to compare methods for different houses. However, the value obtained using the second method on renovated houses diverges from the rest. This was less desired and understandable mostly because using the same methodology, the R-Value obtained for an original Victorian house version was identical to other methods.

A conclusion can be extracted from here. Almost certainly, the impact of insulation on RSI has influenced this value and become the main cause of this discrepancy, which makes some sense when considering that RSI parallel by isothermal planes was created to calculate framing insulate walls. The approach does not match the concept behind the study here described and intended.

A second conclusion, and for study purposes, we can consider that an original Victorian house can perform as an R-value 5, which is considered a poor energy efficient construction similar to a 1 in of high density glass fibre board or 1 in of extruded

69

polystyrene board (XPS), as an example. It becomes more worrisome when products like Polyurethane closed-cell spray foam or Polyisocyanurate spray foam, used to insulate existing houses, have a higher R-value, independently. This assumption let me conclude that a current insulation board would be performing better than a whole house.

On the other hand, a renovated house can reach a R-25, which is an important increment of thermal resistance in the house. Value higher than mandatory R-value for walls above grade (R-24) in additions to existing buildings according SB-12 (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2016), and close to what is mandatory for floors or ceilings without attic space (R-31) on the same supplementary standard.

70

This chapter discuss the difference between embodied energy and operational energy, explain the methodologies used to obtain the values of embodied energy for renovated Victorian houses and new houses, and compare the impacts of new house construction versus renovated.

The difference between Operational Energy and Embodied Energy has been the focus of more and more studies in recent years, addressing concerns regarding the environmental impacts of buildings and construction in the overall consumption of energy and consequent emissions. The operational energy has a major impact in terms of fossil fuels used for space heating and cooling, lighting and the operation of appliances. When the intention is to save energy by reducing energy consumption, decreasing the operational energy is by far the best strategy.

In this matter, the embodied energy is widely forgotten when defining strategies to reduce energy in a building, mostly because reporting is not mandatory and methodologies for how to calculate are new. An important point to note here is the newness of the calculations for embodied energy. Methodologies have been developed, but more work needs to be done by industry to test these methods.

Decision-makers must first obtain more reliable data in order to proceed with the development of policies and performance-based standards that could become a benchmark of environmental values. By creating more scientific measurements, such as life cycle assessments, one can move from prescriptive-based thinking to performance- based criteria, and with that create a sensible road to sustainability. Entities like the City of Toronto are already working towards this type of performance-based criteria (City of Toronto, 2011) and this is playing an important role in making Toronto a more sustainable city.

My contribution to this matter in terms of this study is not to develop a strategy, software or methodology, but to calculate the embodied energy consumed in the renovation of a Victorian house using the methods currently available and at the end to compare this with the energy needed to build a new house. It is well known that retrofitting existing buildings avoids unnecessary carbon emissions associated with total demolition, minimizes material production, and preserves the embodied energy carried over the existing buildings’ life cycle.

Calculations of total energy in a building will include initial energy consumption to operate the house, and amount needed to improve thermal resistance, and consequently reduce the operational energy.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2017), one third of operational energy used in 22 developed countries, including both Canada and the United States, goes to heating, cooling, lightning and the operation of appliances in non-industrial buildings

71

such as homes, offices, hospitals and schools. Embodied energy is not considered in this estimation.

When optimizing energy consumption in these building types, it is important to increase the building envelope performance first, by increasing insulation in foundations, walls and attics, and insulating doors and windows. However, the need for insulating products contributes a higher embodied carbon amount. The key is to understand the range of time needed to match the increased embodied energy after renovations with annual energy saved by reducing energy consumption for heating, cooling and so on. As buildings become more energy efficient, the ratio of embodied energy to lifetime operating energy consumption becomes more significant.

Having a sense of reducing operational energy in buildings and the importance of the embodied energy of structures leads to a more rigorous approach to sustainability. While it is easy to calculate and mitigate operational energy, the impact of embodied energy in structures- global warming, solid wastes, air and water pollution- are substantial.

Of the major building materials, wood has historically been one that requires less energy to produce and has a low conductivity material and good insulating properties. This reinforces the thinking that wood framing must be preserved if possible, and any additions should keep the same philosophy of using wood as the main construction material.

To calculate the initial embodied energy, two different components must be considered; the direct energy, which is the energy used to produce and manufacture the materials, transport it to the site and construct the house and the indirect energy, which is the energy associated with processing, converting and delivering the fuel and energy to its point of use, and also the energy consumed by labourers to commute to work, to feed, etc. The indirect one is truly difficult to measure with the data currently available and more deep research must be done to come up with reliable values for this energy. Consequently, indirect energy will not be considered for the purposes of this study.

Life Cycle Assessment is a performance-based methodology that accounts for the impact of a product, process, or activity based on the effects of extracting raw materials from its source, processing and manufacturing it into usable products, the assembly of those products into a structure, transportation and distribution to be used, maintenance, recycling and final disposal (Canadian Wood Council, 2010). It also includes impacts such as air pollution, ecological toxicity, fossil fuel depletion, global warming, habitat alteration, human health, indoor air quality, ozone depletion and water intake.

This assessment is based on Life-cycle inventory (LCI), which involves tracking and recording basic trajectory from and to nature for specific products or processes. Any calculation or steps used on LCA are derived from LCI data. Based on LCI, it is possible to collect and document relevant data of environmental flow or burdens associated with life cycle stages, such as transportation within and between stages and upstream effects of energy use.

72

Key software and studies are used to produce the data to calculate the LCI. The most well-known software currently is the non-for-profit ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Institute, a world-leading source of life-cycle assessment data and tools, that provides studies and estimators to calculate LCI for different materials and assemblies in a building. By using the AthenaTM EcoCalculator for Residential Assemblies, it was possible to compare the impacts of different types of wall or roof assemblies, as well as insulation products or structural framings (i.e. to calculate differences in impact of using wood stud or steel stud).

This calculator measures the environmental effects of building materials and their processes and disregards measures or accounts for operational energy. The intention was to use it as a quantitative calculator to compare different types of building materials and assemblies for houses, not their effects on energy use or efficiency. With that, a better understanding of materials which may have less detrimental impact when renovating can be gained.

Despite the important data on LCI provided by ATHENA, the software is not intended to work for renovations specifically but rather new constructions. The impacts measured using the calculator extracts data only for assemblies, which is the combination of various layers of materials, each one with different levels of impacts to environment.

For more accurate results, the strategy to calculate the embodied energy was based on verifying the impact by individual material rather than assembly. For this, calculated the amount of material that would be removed during the demolition needed to insulate the existing structure. The scope of this demolition includes stripping walls and ceilings from the house’s interior in order to prepare the surface to receive the insulation. The exterior components of assemblies (i.e. brick, shingles and foundation walls) would be unaltered.

Based on the construction assemblies tested in the HOT2000 calculation exercise for increasing the energy efficiency of Victorian houses, the quantities of new layers of material that would be added to walls, roofs, foundations, etc., to achieve the new operation energy targets were quantified. Those quantities were measured and multipliers were applied to calculate each materials by respective unit of embodied energy and embodied carbon.

For this purpose, the database used to obtain these individual units was the Inventory of Carbon & Energy (ICE) Version 2.0. The ICE database contains data for over 200 materials, broken down into over 30 main material categories (such as cement, concrete, glass, timber, plastics, steel…etc.). The embodied energy data provides the energy consumed to make a building material. This consumption of energy then gives rise to embodied carbon emissions (also known as CO2 emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, carbon dioxide emissions, carbon footprint or CO2e emissions).

This database was jointly created by professors Geoff Hammond and Craig Jones, from the Sustainable Energy Research Team (SERT) of Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, UK. The project was also joint funded under the Carbon Vision Buildings.

After quantifying the materials and completing the calculations, the embodied energy was determined to be as followings:

73

Table 7 - Embodied Energy and Global Warming Potential (GWP) calculations using ICE.

Demolition (MJ) 366,190.69

New Construction (MJ) 243,128.10

Total (MJ) 609,318.79

Demolition (CO2e/Kg) -

New Construction (CO2e/Kg) 20,858

Total (CO2e/Kg) 20,858

Once the total amount of embodied energy and the embodied carbon footprint for demolition and new construction was obtained, it was time to compare this with the operational energy and use this relationship to determine the most holistic means to decrease the total energy consumption of renovating the house.

The HOT2000 was again used, this time to calculate the operational energy, as this software also measures the amount of annual energy consumed by a house in an Energy Consumption Summary Report, which divides energy used for heating, ventilation, and hot water. The fuel used to generate energy varies between oil, wood, gas and electricity depending on the systems used in each specific house. For example, in an original Victorian house the conventional fireplace would be the main system to heat the spaces, with the fuel being wood.

On the other hand, renovated Victorian houses use gas to heat rather than electricity, mostly because is less costly. Currently, the City of Toronto is advocating to use electricity as a source to heat the house because more environmentally friendly due to being generated from renewable sources such as nuclear, hydroelectric generators, wind, solar, biogas, thermal energy, biomass, and so on.

In terms of comfort temperatures, for daytime setpoint was settled 21°C and nightime setpoint 18°C in all calculations to be consistent.

Following, the estimated results obtained regarding the energy consumption for Original and Renovated Victorian House (Table 8):

74

Table 8 - Comparison of Energy Consumption values obtained for Original and Renovated Victorian House.

1,180,567.63 327,935.45 160,762.53 44,656.26 734

25,281.61 7,022.67 15,422.32 4,283.98 164

1,205,849.25 334,958.13 176,184.84 48,940.23 684

38.51 7.83 492

The results show an impressive reduction of energy consumption between the two examples (Figure 59). These results are not surprising considering that it is comparing a Victorian house as it was built at end of 19th century, with no insulation at all, and a totally renovated house, using modern methods and materials.

Estimated Annual Energy Consumption

Estimated Annual DHW 1,400,000. MJ Heating Energy 1,200,000. MJ Consumption 1,000,000. MJ Estimated Annual Space 800,000. MJ Heating Energy 600,000. MJ Consumption 400,000. MJ Estimade Annual Space + 200,000. MJ DHW Energy Consumption . MJ Original Renovated Victorian Victorian House House

Figure 59 - Comparison of Estimated Annual Energy Consumption for Original and Renovated Victorian Houses.

Another significant finding to note is the 492% reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, which represents around 30.68 tonnes/year (Figure 60). This is a significant amount of carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous Oxide (N2O) or even Fluorinated gases, all of which are associated with activities such as burning fossil fuels to produce materials, solid waste, trees or wood products, the transportation of all these materials to manufacture or construction site as well as the removal of such materials during demolitions, and transportation to landfills.

75

Once obtained the results for embodied and operational energy before and after renovation, the intent was to obtain a correlation between energy consumed year after year in an original Victorian house with no improvements and a renovated house, which has seen the energy consumption fall by 1,029,664.41 MJ a year.

Energy consumption depends on factors other than just increasing envelope thermal resistance or replacing mechanical systems more energy efficient ones. There are many different factors that affect energy consumption, including the number of household residents, age of the dwelling, number of rooms and areas of each house, average household income, and even level of education. Energy use is higher for households where at least one member had a post-secondary education compared to those where the highest level of education attained was no higher than high school graduation according Census Canada (Statistics Canada, 2016).

Consumption varies according multiple factors, most of them difficult to measured reason for what will be challenging to reach accuracy in the results. However, studies must be continued to be released to understand similarities and define strategies that would address how to reduce energy consumption and consequently reduce the impact on environment.

Using the results extracted from the certified software HOT2000, the table Estimated Greenhouse Gas above (Table 8) compares the total energy Emissions including embodied and operational energy consumption of the renovated and 40.00 tonnes/year unrenovated house. The first option considered the same consumption year 30.00 tonnes/year after year, without alterations. The second 20.00 tonnes/year option, the renovated house calculation, included the total embodied energy 10.00 tonnes/year consumed during the renovation after one Original Renovated Victorian Victorian year (year 2), which is the expected time House House range needed to complete construction. On year 3, the consumption drops to the Figure 60 - Comparison of Estimated GHG emissions total estimated annual energy for Original and Renovated Victorian Houses. consumption after improving the house.

The Figure 61 illustrates the progressive consumption for both cases and the inversion point when the renovated house start to perform better than the original Victorian house.

In conclusion, it is important to note that after the first year of renovations, the embodied energy expended to renovate the house is already absorbed by the incredible reduction of operational energy in the house caused by the renovation, and then some. Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) are drastically reduced, making the house more sustainable and efficient.

76

Estimated Annual Energy Consumption (Total Energy)

14,500,000 MJ

12,500,000 MJ

10,500,000 MJ

8,500,000 MJ

6,500,000 MJ

4,500,000 MJ

2,500,000 MJ

500,000 MJ

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year Year 10 Year Not Renovated Renovated

Figure 61 - Evolution of Energy Consumption for Original and Renovated Victorian Houses. 10 Meanwhile, additional studies can be extracted using these calculations that would allow for a better understanding of the environmental impacts in different cases of study outside of existing houses and their renovations. It became important to extend the experience obtained through this process and compare it with the energy necessary to build new houses.

To shift to a different level, another study was added to this document that was not previously defined, based on comparing the total energy (operational + embodied) necessary to raise a new modern, energy efficient house in the same property of the case of study by tearing down the existing building. After getting the total amount of energy to build a new house, the principle was to compare those values with the embodied energy used to renovate a Bay-and-Gable house, plus the annual operational energy necessary to operate the house. By comparing both cases, the strategy is to acknowledge how many years a new house would need to equal energy consumption of a renovated Victorian house.

The methodology was based on simulating a hypothetical new house with the same gross building area (GBA) and envelope area of previous one. The design of this new house was not considered as a variable. The component areas used to run the calculations included: - Foundations and Footings; - Intermediate Floors; - Exterior Walls; - Windows; - Interior Walls, and, - Roofs.

10 The Graphic represents the total energy consumption, merging embodied energy and operational energy in the energy represented by blue line. The initial peak showed in counting on with the energy used to execute the renovation, reason to increase the energy during the year 1.

77

The energy necessary to demolish the existing building was also included. Using the AthenaTM EcoCalculator for Residential Assemblies the Embodied Energy Consumption (MJ) and Green Greenhouse Gas emissions for the assemblies was extracted, thereby establishing comparison parameters between the two cases.

The diagram below (Figure 62) describes the results obtained. Estimated Total Annual Energy Consumption Evolution New Energy Efficient House vs Renovated Victorian House 4,500,000 MJ

3,500,000 MJ

2,500,000 MJ

1,500,000 MJ

500,000 MJ

Year 1 Year Year 3 Year 5 Year 7 Year 9 Year

Year 11 Year 13 Year 15 Year 17 Year 19 Year 21 Year New Energy Efficient House Renovated Victorian House Figure 62 - Evolution of Estimated Energy Consumption for New Energy Efficient house and Renovated Bay-and-Gable house.

From Figure 62, we see that it takes 17 years before the total energy of the new house matches the renovated house’s consumption, which reinforces the fact that renovating an existing house is still being a good strategy. Not included, however, were factors such as environmental comfort or energy costs, which could make the new houses considered more energy efficient instead of the renovated houses.

Analyzing these calculations has confirmed the importance of proceeding with more renovations when possible across the city as a good strategy, since the short-term efficiency of improving existing houses can reduce the ecological footprint of Toronto and complement strategies already in place such as producing more green energy. Likewise, the importance of maintaining the historical references of these house typologies to preserve the cultural sustainability among the neighbourhoods. 11 1,600,000.00 MJ 1,400,000.00 MJ Medium Density Spray Foam 1,200,000.00 MJ Mineral Wool 1,000,000.00 MJ Fiber Glass 800,000.00 MJ 600,000.00 MJ 400,000.00 MJ

200,000.00 MJ Energy .00 MJ Embodied 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Fig. 63 - Relation between the operational energy along the lifetime of a Victorian House and the embodied energy.

11 This Graphic intends to demonstrate the impact of each insulation type on the overall embodied energy, and it reflects in terms of energy consumption. To note that fiber glass and mineral wool have same results for the type of intervention referred along this thesis.

78

Since the moment that I decided to start this study, the intent has been to expand my knowledge of construction methods used to increase energy performance and to reduce the environmental impact of existing and new construction. My goal was also to better understand the nature of the Victorian houses that sprawl across Toronto and preserve the beautiful skylines of these neighbourhoods by finding efficient strategies that can convince owners to undergo renovations rather than tear down historic houses to build new ones.

During the study, I found that a key argument for convincing people to adopt renovation strategies, apart from the economics, was to address environmental issues such as the impact of diverting material from demolition and new construction to landfill. Noting the environmental impacts of new resources used to build new houses is also a part of this argument.

To address this issue, it became important to analyze previously released studies comparing conventional houses and high efficiency houses’ performances based on energy consumption (Holladay, 2013). To establish this correlation, it was necessary to use University of British Columbia Architecture Professor Ray Cole’s values for conventional and energy efficient houses in Toronto and compare that with the original and renovated Bay-and-Gable house values extracted from HOT2000.

In this case, it was necessary to convert the values presented in the article “All About Embodied Energy” from British Thermal Units (MMBtu) to Mega-Joules (MJ), and thus enable a comparison with values obtained in this document. As well, instead of considering the energy consumed in a 350 m2 space (as shown in Ray Cole’s study), the energy amount was converted to a 410 m2 house area, which is the total area of the Bay- and-Gable used as a case of study.

The table below (Table 9) expresses the results just considering the operational energy:

Table 9 - Energy consumption for different types of houses (Operational Energy).

168,215.17 1,435,983.20 87%

96,476.35 823,578.60 92%

1,263,890.88 12,638,908.80 -

164,155.02 1,641,550.20 87%

There are some interesting facts to extract here. As initially assumed, original houses are far less efficient than any other case. However, the main thing to note is that a renovated Victorian house can equal or even perform better that a new house built in a conventional way, and could be made even better by changing the initial target of 40% improvement for something more aggressive. Nevertheless, the renovated Victorian

79

house usually continues to perform worse than an energy efficient house built from scratch, consuming double the amount of energy in a year. As a fact, it is difficult for a renovated house to equal a new energy efficient one because of the existing constraints when renovating, which could include decaying materials, difficulty in accessing key areas for construction, and so on

An important subject to return to in the conclusion is the relation of embodied energy and operational energy, and compare by merging these two components. An additional study was released, as a complement to the Ray Cole study, which reported a need for 10 years to equal the operational energy to embodied energy for a typical Torontonian house. Applying this thinking to the case of study (Figure 61Table 8), only 3 years would be necessary for the embodied energy and operational energy to be equal, regardless of the initial embodied energy used to build the house.

Regarding the energy performance of the Victorian style Bay-and-Gable, it was important to test different methods to reach a number that would measure the global energy efficiency of house and attach a respective value to enable terms of comparison. Therefore, it was possible to compare an original Victorian house’s performance to 1 inch of high density glass fiberboard or 1 inch of extruded polystyrene board (XPS), and a renovated house close to mandatory R-values for floors or ceilings without attic space (R- 31), described in the SB-12 (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2016). The intention is not to replace calculation values by component neither become mandatory in legislations, but rather to become one more variable of comparison when considering the construction methods of each different house.

In conclusion, it is important to note that after the first year of renovations, the embodied energy expended to renovate the house is already absorbed by the incredible reduction in the house’s operational energy made possible by the renovation, and then some. This allows a drastic reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) and makes the house more sustainable and efficient. It is still important to consider renovating a Victorian house rather than building a new one in its place. Apart from the financial cost of tearing it down and building a new one, the energy consumption of a new build would equal more than 200% of the renovated option’s embodied energy at the initial stage, and would then need close to 17 years for the two options to be equal in energy.

Finally, this study must not end with the results released here, but rather become the basis for further research on future renovations to these houses, using the strategies here described and proceeding with energy measurements to ratify the results. There should also be continuing study of the calculation methods for overall RSI described, pursuing an accurate formula that will yield more exact results, to better assist homeowners to understand the behavior of their houses.

80

Allodi, Mary Macaulay, Peter N. Moogk, Beate Stock, Rosemarie L. Towell, A. ruggles (1991) Berczy. First. Ottawa: Ottawa National Gallery of Canada. Aponte, V. (2004) “Guide To Better Building Envelopes for Large Buildings,” Thermal Wise, pp. 1–15. Bateman, C. (2013) “How Toronto got the nickname Hogtown,” blogTO, October. Available at: https://www.blogto.com/city/2013/10/how_toronto_got_the_nickname_hogtown/. Borrett, M. (2009) Toronto’s Twin Italianate Villas, Spacing Toronto. Available at: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3107/3240527670_d56131e0fe_b.jpg. Cabbagetown Heritage Conservation District Committee (2018) Bay and Gable Style. Available at: http://www.cabbagetownhcd.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/bay.jpg. Canadian Wood Council (2010) “Energy and the Enviornment in Residential Contruction,” Sustainable Building Series, 1(1), pp. 1–16. Available at: http://cwc.ca/wp- content/uploads/publications-Energy-and-the-Environment.pdf. City of Toronto (1904) “Toronto City Bylaw 4408.” City of Toronto (2011) Zero Emissions Buildings Framework. Available at: http://www.zeroemissionsplatform.eu/. Colombo, S. J. et al. (2007) Climate Change Projections for Ontario: Practical Information for Policymakers and Planners. doi: CCRR-05. Cook, G. C. (2001) “Construction of London’s Victorian sewers: the vital role of Joseph Bazalgette.,” Postgraduate Medical Journal, 77(914), pp. 802–804. doi: 10.1136/pmj.77.914.802. Cruickshank, T. (2008) Old Toronto Houses. Firefly Books. Doucet, M. and Weaver, J. C. (1991) Housing the North American City. Illustrate. Hamilton: MQUP. E. Winterton, D. (2015) Toronto’s Edwardian Skyscraper Row. Environment & Energy Division (2017) TransformTO. Toronto. Available at: https://www.toronto.ca/services-payments/water-environment/environmentally- friendly-city-initiatives/transformto/. Fudge, S. (2017) Bay & Gable Victorian Architecture In Toronto, urbaneer.com. Available at: http://www.urbaneer.com/images/resized/media/uploads/blog/Bay_Gable_HERO_600 x469.jpg. Harstone, J. (2005) Between the Bridge and the Brewery. Toronto: Trinity Bellwoods Neighbourhood Association. Holladay, M. (2013) “All About Embodied Energy,” Green Building Adviser, November, p. 5. Available at: http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/musings/all-about- embodied-energy. Hulchanski, J. D. (2010) “Neighbourhood Trends in Divided Cities,” Neighbourhood

81

Change Community University Research Alliance, June, p. 95. IEA, I. E. A. (2017) “Energy Efficiency Indicators Highlights (2017 edition),” International Energy Agency, p. 102. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004. Jennifer, S. H. B. (1988) “Duncan Cameron,” Dictionary of Canadian biography. University of Toronto. Available at: http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/cameron_duncan_7E.html. Kyles, S. (1999) Cottages. Kyles, S. (2001) Italianate, Ontario Architecture. Available at: http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/italianate.htm (Accessed: January 25, 2018). Kyles, S. (2010) “ClassicalRevival @ www.ontarioarchitecture.com.” Available at: http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/ClassicalRevival.htm. Kyles, S. (2012) Renaissance Revival, www.OntarioArchitecture.com. Available at: http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/rendun1.jpg. Lost Toronto (2013) Trinity Bellwoods/Gore Vale/Then and Now. Available at: https://losttoronto2.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/pictures-r-6088.jpg. Lstiburek, J. (2004) Builder’s Guide to Cold Climates. 2011th ed. Edited by S. Finegan and S. Baczek. Canada: Building Science Corporation. M. S. Careless, J. (2013) “Toronto - Settlement,” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Available at: http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/toronto/#h3_jump_0. Mace, J. (2015) Nation Building: Gothic Revival Houses in Upper Canada and Canada West. York University. Available at: https://yorkspace.library.yorku.ca/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10315/30047/Mace_Jessica _L_2015_PhD.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y. McHugh, P. and Bozikovic, A. (2017) Toronto Architecture: A City Guide. McClelland & Stewart. Ministry of Government and Constumer Services (2012) Archives of Ontario. Available at: http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/index.aspx. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (2016) MMA Supplementary Standard SB-12. Mirvish+Gehry Toronto (2015a) Architecture of Toronto: The Annex Style House, Projectcore Inc. Available at: http://mirvishandgehrytoronto.com/wp- content/uploads/2015/10/37-Madison-Ave.jpg. Mirvish+Gehry Toronto (2015b) Architecture of Toronto: The Bay-and-Gable Style House, Gehry International, Inc., Architects. Available at: http://mirvishandgehrytoronto.com/index.php/2015/10/27/architecture-of-toronto- the-bay-and-gable-house/ (Accessed: March 3, 2017). Mumma, T. (1995) “Reducing the Embodied Energy of Buildings,” Home Energy. Available at: http://www.homeenergy.org/show/article/id/1105. Official Fine Homebuilding Post (2010) Vapor Barriers Are a Good Thing, Right?, Fine Homebuilding Website. Available at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/finehomebuilding.s3.tauntoncloud.com/app/uploads/2016/ 04/09184352/FHB-VAPOR-DRIVE-main.jpg. Palmer, A. L. (2016) Historical Dictionary of Architecture. Second. Rowman & Littlefield. Available at:

82

https://books.google.ca/books?id=aMsvDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA154&lpg=PA154&dq=the+Ge orgian+style+was+named+by+the+first+three+King+Georges&source=bl&ots=BYQB6pu 3dm&sig=tKKpJFnFNKMfcZq6ngJHHgCwxMs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiY69Xr8ZfbAh Uc0IMKHW07AooQ6AEIZjAF#v=onepage&q&. Rock, I. (2015) The Victorian & Edwardian House Manual. Second. Edited by I. R. MacMillan. Haynes Publishing. Ruskin, J. (1883) Ruskin’s 1883 Lecture on the “Realistic Schools of Painting.” Available at: http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/pater/leng4.html. Saint, A. (1976) Richard Norman Shaw. Yale University Press. Schubert, D. (2014) Contemporary Perspectives on Jane Jacobs. Edited by D. Schubert. Routledge. Statistics Canada, C. of P. (2016) Trinity-Bellwoods. Toronto. Available at: https://www.toronto.ca/ext/sdfa/Neighbourhood Profiles/pdf/2016/pdf1/cpa81.pdf. Symposium, C. M. et al. (2013) “Thermal Bridging of Masonry Veneer Claddings and Energy Code Compliance,” 12th Canadian Masonry Symposium. Taylor, D. (2014) Toronto´disappearing Bay and Gable houses, Historic Toronto. Available at: https://tayloronhistory.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/west-side-of-draper- st.jpg. Turner, C. and Partington, R. (2015) “Home Through the Decades.” Knowlhill: NHBC Foundation, p. 48. University of the West of England (2009) Evolution of Building Materials. Available at: https://fet.uwe.ac.uk/conweb/house_ages/elements/print.htm (Accessed: March 22, 2018). Warzecha, M. (2014) “Decoding the Victorians: A picture-perfect Toronto housing style guide.” Toronto: BuzzBuzzNews, p. 1. Available at: http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/2014/12/toronto-housing-style-guide-victorians.html. Weir, S. (2016) “THE BASIC FORM,” JSSAC. Available at: http://dalspace.library.dal.ca:8080/bitstream/handle/10222/71914/vol41_1_57_76.pdf ?sequence=5&isAllowed=y (Accessed: February 24, 2018). Wilson, W. R. (2013) John Graves Simcoe, history is a form of autobiography, Historical Narratives of Early Canada. Available at: http://www.uppercanadahistory.ca/simcoe/simcoe1.html. Windfinder (2018) Wind, waves & weather forecast: Toronto Pearson Airport. Available at: https://www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/toronto_airport.

83